New Clause 4 - Emergency medical care
Fire and Rescue Services Bill
4:30 pm

Mr Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The new clause would introduce a requirement on fire and rescue authorities to make provision for medical co-response. I do not expect the Government to accept it, but I hope that the Minister of State will be able to say something about how the Government will ensure that fire authorities take seriously the intention that medical co-response should be available so that medical assistance can be given, particularly in less populated areas where there may be a time lapse between the arrival of the first emergency service at the scene of an incident and back-up from other emergency services.

The new clause is drafted to mirror the obligations imposed by clauses 6, 7 and 8, and I tried to word it in such a way that it would not impose unreasonable burdens by making it clear that there are tests for a level of reasonable provision to provide emergency medical care at the scene of a fire, road accident or other emergency. There is also provision for consultation with the local NHS ambulance trusts to enable proper cross-service preparation of the plans and an operation of the service that is as seamless as possible.

In view of the time, it would not be helpful for me to go into the new clause in any more detail. I acknowledge that the Government are unlikely to

accept it in its entirety but look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say about how they will incentivise the service.

Mr Nick Raynsford (Minister of State (Local and Regional Government), Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)

I appreciate the spirit in which the hon. Gentleman introduced his new clause. I hope that these brief remarks will give him the assurances that he is seeking and enable him to withdraw the new clause.

The new duty under new clause 4 would be limited to what a fire and rescue authority judged to be reasonable but would still impose a new core duty to provide medical assistance in certain incidents. I recognise the intention of the new clause, but the Government believe that this proposed extension of fire and rescue authority duties would be premature.

The draft fire and rescue authority national framework makes it clear that the aim of emergency response is to reduce deaths and the number and severity of injuries. The use by some fire and rescue authorities of defibrillator equipment is an example of how adapting services can improve outcomes and save lives. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the national framework asks all fire and rescue authorities to explore the benefits of working with others and of implementing first and/or co-responder schemes. Of course, that will be the subject of consultation, possibly—if I may say this in a slightly barbed way—before Royal Assent. I am sure that he will appreciate the benefit of taking speedy action on that matter.

First responder and co-responder schemes are very welcome and should be encouraged. The powers available under clause 11 ensure that a fire and rescue authority can equip itself and respond to incidents. However, we do not believe that it would be appropriate at this time to make that type of activity a core function. It is a core function of the ambulance service and should remain its primary responsibility, despite the fact that there are huge advantages from such schemes that ensure, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, that the fire and rescue service is able to undertake life-saving work if it is first on the scene and is suitably equipped. We look forward to receiving the responses of fire and rescue authorities and others to the national framework. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will feel able to withdraw the new clause in the light of those comments.

Mr Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)

I was very interested in what the Minister said. I noted his careful use of the word ''premature'', which implied, at least to my ever optimistic mind, that he believes that at some time in the future the service will have evolved sufficiently to incorporate such activities as a core part of the role of fire and rescue authorities.

I fret somewhat that by not making such a duty a core function, the Minister sends a subliminal message to fire and rescue authorities, some of which may be disinclined to extend their horizons unless they are absolutely required to, particularly at a time when they are under a great deal of pressure, as they are now. He focused on the considerable results that have been achieved through the use of defibrillators. It slightly concerns me that in political circles defibrillators have

become almost synonymous with medical attention by the fire service. There are many types of medical support that have nothing to do with cardiac arrest and that might be just as effective, if not more so, that the fire service could appropriately deliver at the scene of an incident if it is first on the scene. I fully appreciate why defibrillators have taken the headlines, but it is important that we do not get carried away with one particular fashionable trend.

I hope that the Minister will ensure that the message gets across to fire and rescue authorities that, although such a function might not formally be a core responsibility, it is an important and developing area alongside the non-conventional work that fire and rescue authorities will be doing. I hope that the Minister's carefully chosen words that it would be premature for it to become a core responsibility at this stage are widely understood and heard, so that any fire and rescue authorities that were thinking of not treating the need for medical co-response with significant seriousness think about this debate as the start of a path—hopefully—to it doing so.

I will not start quoting international comparisons, but examples from countries where the fire service typically provides the first medical response suggest that quite a lot could be done that would be useful in saving lives and reducing serious harm to individuals through having a fire service that is equipped to intervene in such a way at the scene. I am grateful to the Minister for what he has said, and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.