Agenda item

To consider the following Notice of Motion, which has been submitted by Cllr J.J. Preece pursuant to Standing Order 9 (1):

"While thanking Hampshire Fire & Rescue Service (HFRS) for its recent partnership in monitoring fire safety in multi-storey residential blocks in Rushmoor, this Council resolves to ask:

·       Hampshire Fire & Rescue Authority to ensure that HFRS is fully funded and resourced to keep the residents of Rushmoor safe, including having all necessary trained personnel, equipment and procedures in place so that fires at all levels of the tallest residential buildings can be tackled effectively;

·       all relevant partners to conduct an Emergency Planning Exercise as soon as practicable to test the response to a major fire in a multi-storey residential block."

The Council was asked to consider the following Motion, which had been submitted by Cllr J.J. Preece in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 9 (1).  It was MOVED by Cllr J.J. Preece; SECONDED by Cllr T.D. Bridgeman – That

“While thanking Hampshire Fire and Rescue Services (HFRS) for its recent partnership in monitoring fire safety in multi-storey residential blocks in Rushmoor, this Council resolves to ask:

·                Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority to ensure that HFRS is fully funded and resourced to keep the residents of Rushmoor safe, including having all the necessary trained personnel, equipment and procedures in place so that fires at all levels of the tallest residential building can be tackled effectively;

·                All relevant partners to conduct an Emergency Planning Exercise as soon as practicable to test the response to a major fire in a multi-storey residential block.”

In introducing the Motion, Cllr Preece stated that the Grenfell Tower fire had been the worst UK fire disaster since the Second World War.  At least 80 people had met a horrific death and he considered that this had been preventable.  Cllr Preece also felt that the subsequent response of Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council had angered many people.   He said that people in Rushmoor would want to know that such an event could not happen in Rushmoor and that, if it did, Rushmoor Borough Council would spring into action with a clearly defined disaster plan. 

Cllr Preece commented that it was reassuring to know that Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service had conducted fire safety checks on the five multi-storey buildings in Rushmoor, including Alexander House and Stafford House.  Both buildings had passed fire safety checks although cladding at Stafford House and areas of external insulation at Alexander House needed to be sorted out and that follow-up work would be required. 

Cllr Preece stated that fire safety work was very complicated and that fire safety inspections were about saving lives and therefore required properly qualified fire personnel to carry them out.  Cllr Preece quoted Hampshire Chief Fire Officer, Dave Curry, who once said “sprinklers are a must for high rise buildings” and had also cited the deaths of two firefighters at Shirley Tower in Southampton in 2010 and a fire at Lakanal House in London in 2009 in which six people had died.  Cllr Preece felt it was imperative that new sprinkler systems should be inspected by qualified people. 

Cllr Preece spoke of the recent campaign to keep Rushmoor fire station operational 24 hours per day and was disappointed that further cuts were now being imposed on the fire station.   It was noted that Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service was proposing to cut the number of immediately available fire crew from twelve to ten.   Cllr Preece understood this to mean that only two fire engines would be available during the day and one at night.  The Fire Brigade Union was fighting this proposal and proposing alternative cuts.  Cllr Preece was disappointed that all fire services were facing austerity measures and that this included those firefighters who the nation saw risking their lives at the Grenfell Tower fire disaster.   Cllr Preece was also concerned as fire services called on neighbours when they were stretched, so cuts to other services would also impact on Rushmoor.

Cllr Preece drew attention to two major fires in Surrey on 11th July, 2017 when Rushmoor crews had been called on, along with Fleet, Hartley Wintney, Bordon, Horsham, Surbiton, Sutton and Guildford fire stations, along with many others.   It was understood that calls to the Surrey call centre had had to be switched to Merseyside.  The local fire service was both facing cuts and being stretched to provide services.  Cllr Preece said that it was against this background that the Government was asking for the fire inspection of buildings: multi-storey residential, other blocks of flats and homes in multiple occupation and high-rise offices.   Cllr Preece understood that there were currently half the number of inspectors than there had been in 2010.  Cllr Preece was of the opinion that to save lives and prevent further tragedies the Council needed to keep the pressure on to protect Rushmoor’s fire service. 

Cllr Preece was pleased to learn about the emergency exercise which Rushmoor carried out each year with Hampshire and the Police and Fire and Rescue Service to test procedures, etc.   Cllr Preece called for an emergency exercise to be carried out to test the response to a high rise building fire in Rushmoor.  Such an exercise would require several units, specialist equipment for fighting a tower block fire (which would have to come from Surrey).  The response times for all of these units would need to be tested.   The exercise would also need to test the evacuation and displacement of people from their homes as well as looking at recovery from a major fire, including re-housing people in the medium term if their homes required extensive repairs and what the Council could do if homes were destroyed. Cllr Preece called on Members to support the Motion.

During discussion, reference was made to the lessons learned from previous fire tragedies and fire assessments to be carried out by premises owners to reduce the risk of a fire starting.  There was an investigation underway by the fire authority into the causes of the fire at Grenfell Towers as well as police, coroner’s and public enquiries.  When the findings of these investigations were known there would no doubt be changes in fire legislation and building regulations to ensure members of the public were fully protected.  Members’ attention was also drawn to the introduction of a new Fire Inspectorate which would oversee the operation of all fire services across England. Reference was also made to the positive findings of the recent peer review challenge for Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service. 

Attention was also drawn to emergency planning arrangements, which was currently co-ordinated in Hampshire by Hampshire County Council, involving all relevant agencies.  In Rushmoor, the Council’s role was to operate a control centre for which effective communication was vital to all those involved.   The Borough Services Policy and Review Panel had been given an opportunity to watch the control centre in action at an emergency planning exercise.

It was MOVED by Cllr D.E. Clifford and SECONDED by Cllr G.B. Lyon – that the Motion be referred to the Borough Services Policy and Review Panel for consideration. 

During discussion, it was suggested that the Rushmoor Fire Station Commander and a representative of the Fire Brigade Union should be invited to take part in the Panel’s discussions on the Motion.  The point was made that there should be a focus on whether Rushmoor would be ‘fit for purpose’ to deal with a tragedy similar to what happened at Grenfell Tower in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.  This would not only include liaison with Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service and the Police but also with the Garrison, social landlords, local hotels and other agencies to test how partners would respond in situations of crisis and disaster to recover situations and the process of developing contingency plans. 

Following further discussion, the Motion to refer the original Motion to the Borough Services Policy and Review Panel was put to the Meeting. There voted FOR: 32; AGAINST: 0 and the Motion to refer the issue to the Borough Services Policy and Review Panel was DECLARED CARRIED unanimously.