Fire Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1984

HL Deb 24 October 1984 vol 456 cc206-12

3.11 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Lyell) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 17th July be approved.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am sure your Lordships will be interested to know that this order deals with two aspects of the fire services in Northern Ireland. First it deals with the constitution, the powers and the duties of the fire authority for Northern Ireland, and then it goes on to deal with fire precautions. The order will re-enact, with two important amendments to which I shall return, the legislation which establishes the fire authority for Northern Ireland as the sole fire authority for the Province, and sets out its composition and functions. Part II of the order corresponds largely to the Fire Services Act (Northern Ireland) 1969 as modified by the Fire Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1973.

The first amendment relates to the method of appointment of the chairman and vice-chairman of the authority. At present they are elected from among 17 members of the authority. It is now proposed that, while the authority will still consist of 17 members, the chairman and vice-chairman will be appointed for a four-year term with 15 other members. In adopting this new procedure no criticism is implied of the present or previous holders of these posts, for each has rendered service to the authority and to the community: rather the amendment seeks to bring the fire authority into line with other major public bodies in the Province. The housing executive, police authority and electricity service—those three important bodies—have their chairman and vice-chairman appointed rather than elected. The second amendment which I mentioned seeks to bring the position of the chief fire officer into line with that in Great Britain. At present the chief fire officer is responsible to the authority for the work of the brigade while the secretary reports to the authority on administrative matters. It is proposed now that the chief fire officer be responsible to the authority for both operational and administrative matters.

Part III of the order deals with fire precautions, and again the intention is to align the law in Northern Ireland with that in Great Britain. Some premises are of course already required to be provided with what we call means of escape and fire precautions under existing legislation, but under the designation order system which we propose and set out in Article 22 a much wider range of premises can be brought within the scope of the fire precautions system. Once designated, then all premises in that particular class will be required to obtain from the authority a fire certificate which will be issued only when the authority is satisfied that the premises are provided with adequate means of escape and, if appropriate, efficient alarms, fire fighting and other fire precautions equipment. Much of Part III is concerned with the detailed workings of the fire certification system, and I do not propose to describe it in detail, although I would mention that penalties for contravention of the order are being brought into line with those for similar offences in Great Britain.

The implementation of Part III will involve the authority in a considerable number of additional responsibilities, the importance of which was highlighted by the tragic fire earlier this year at the Maysfield Leisure Centre in Belfast. As has already been indicated, additional funds are being made available to the authority to provide for the creation of a further 10 fire precautions posts. In case noble Lords are in doubt, these posts are people, human beings, not stakes or things driven into the ground. I, too, was a little confused by this.

Finally, Part IV restates the functions of the Department of the Environment in relation to the department's power to appoint inspectors to report on the performance of the authority.

I have been fairly brief. I hope that I have not cut too many comers; and I beg to move that the draft order be approved.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 17th July be approved.—(Lord Lyell.)

3.16 p.m.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for introducing this order. I regret that I cannot be as brief as the noble Lord has been, and I must apologise in advance. May I first say, as I have said on most of the Northern Ireland orders, that, although this is said to be mainly a consolidation measure, again we have an item of 53 articles and five schedules which we cannot amend; we can only endorse.

My particular interest in this order is not only because of my Front Bench responsibilities but because for some five years I served in our own National Fire Service and was chairman of quite a number of Fire Brigades Union committees. The Fire Brigades Union, in a letter to the Assembly in November 1983, stressed that it is the only recognised representative body for firemen in Northern Ireland, with nearly 100 per cent. of the full-time personnel in membership and a substantial proportion of retained members. On some of the matters to which I refer I am advised by the Fire Brigades Union.

At this stage I am certain that we ought to pay a tribute to the fire service personnel in Northern Ireland, who are not only engaged in fire fighting work but, as we saw in the case of the fire services called to the recent tragic incident in Brighton, are also heavily involved in rescue work in addition to fighting fires.

There was a very helpful report from the Northern Ireland Assembly, which considered this order. No doubt as other noble Lords have done, I have read the proceedings and the evidence with great care. It was unfortunate that for some reason the Fire Brigades Union had not received any communication. I say it was unfortunate. In my experience the Northern Ireland Office is very efficient, and the last thing they will do is overlook a matter of this kind; but the union did not receive communication, did not receive the order, and the secretary concerned had to obtain a copy personally. Having now had an opportunity to consider the order, which they had not when they were before the committee, there are a number of points in addition to others that I shall raise, and the information will be helpful not only to the union but to the public in general.

I note that no evidence was given on behalf of the new fire authority, although they were invited twice so to do. The authority sent a letter after the committee had interviewed various bodies, and I shall refer to one or two of the points. I note that the noble Lord referred to the agreement of the Government to accept the recommendation of the Assembly that the position of the chief officer should be changed, and that he should act as the chief administrative officer, and not that the secretary, as previously, should undertake some of those duties. The Assembly and the fire authority wanted that, as did the unions.

The Minister also referred to the new decision to have the Secretary of State (or, as it says, the department) appoint the chairman and vice-chairman of the new authority. The Assembly has made it absolutely clear that it would wish that the members of the authority should be left to elect their own chairman and vice-chairman. I note from the annual report of the fire authority that the Minister (then Mr. David Mitchell, Parliamentary Under-Secretary) sought the authority's view on this particular proposal. The authority replied that in its view the practice that the members should appoint the officers should continue. It sent a letter to that effect to the Assembly.

Despite having asked for and received the authority's view, the Minister rejected it. I should like to know why it was rejected. The Assembly wants it, the fire authority wants it, and the Fire Brigades Union wants it. Although the noble Lord said that this brings the matter into line with other public bodies in Northern Ireland, it does not bring it into line with all other fire authorities in Great Britain, which act as committees of local authorities and elect their own chairmen.

Article 8 lists various sections of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) which are to apply to the fire authority as if it were to a district council, but there appear to be two glaring omissions. Sections 121 and 122 of the 1972 Act, which relate to the minutes of proceedings and public notices of meetings, are not included in the list under Article 8. I need hardly stress that the fire authority is a public body, which spends public money, but it would appear that the public are not informed of meetings of the authority. Yet I understand that if a member of the public got to know that there was a meeting and attended, he could claim a public seat under Section 23 of the 1972 Act, which is embodied in this particular article. It would appear that the fire authority should be in the same position as the fire committee of other councils in Great Britain.

Minutes should also be available. I understand that even the regional secretary of the Fire Brigades Union of Northern Ireland does not have this information about meetings and does not have copies of the minutes. May I say in passing that I showed the secretary of the Fire Brigades Union a copy of the annual report of the previous fire authority, and the union had never seen that either.

Under Articles 6 and 7 are the requirements involving the fire authority for the provision and maintenance of hydrants and water supplies. These are at present embodied in various sections (Sections 5, 6 and 7) of the Fire Services Act 1969. These requirements are to be withdrawn from the fire authority and handed over to the DoE's water division. I need hardly stress that hydrants and open water supplies are vital to any fire service, and this provision in the new order will mean that the fire authority's expertise will be lost and the authority's own direct labour force will be jeopardised in this matter.

The sections of the 1969 Act are compatible with Sections 13 to 16 of the Fire Service Act 1947, which applies to Great Britain, and I note that this particular question was raised not only by the unions but in the consideration given to the matter by the Northern Ireland Assembly. I note that views were expressed on behalf of the department that a lesser body—namely, the fire authority—cannot give directions to a higher authority, the department or the Government.

Nevertheless, I see in the annual report, on page 20, under the heading, "Provision of Water for Fire Fighting", an extract from Section 5 of the Fire Services Act (Northern Ireland) 1969. I quote: It shall be the duty of a fire authority to provide and maintain … such fire hydrants as are necessary for securing … water in case of fire". If a lesser authority cannot instruct a higher authority, how did that happen in the case of the two fire authorities which existed before the completely new Northern Ireland Fire Authority was established? I should like to ask the Minister why they could not accept the Northern Ireland recommendation 2.3 in Chapter II. Perhaps I may quote it: The Committee notes the Department's contention that a Government cannot be required to do something by a subordinate authority. It recommends, therefore, that Article 6 be amended to require the Department to provide a constant supply at an adequate pressure to hydrants located on the advice of the authority within 28 days of being notified of the need to do so, and that such other consequential amendments of Article 6 as may be required are also made". I cannot understand why the Government cannot accept that particular recommendation.

While on the subject of hydrants and water supplies, I note that the annual report of the previous fire authority states that no provision is made for formal recording or maintenance of open water supplies apart from the preparation of particular cards. Naturally, it is common sense that cards of open water supply should be available for the personnel on fire appliances. It seems incredible to me that there is not available at the central headquarters a general record of open water supplies. The whole general question was raised by the Assembly, and I have asked about that particular point.

Article 9 deals with the preparation and submission of an establishment scheme. There is some concern at the reluctance of the Government to provide some sort of safety valve on this question similar to that which is in the Great Britain Act. That provides for a public inquiry at the discretion of the Secretary of State. Article 9 contains no such provision for Northern Ireland. I cannot see any just reason for not doing so.

In that connection it is convenient to move on to Article 50 because that retains a previous provision for the appointment of an inspector or inspectors. But the new order omits any reference to special practical experience required of a person or persons appointed to such posts. I am advised that there has been no actual appointment since 1969, even though the provision has been there. Instead, on occasions as required the Home Office inspectorate has been requested by the Department of the Environment to carry out inspections of the Northern Ireland fire brigade and to make recommendations. As this provision for the appointment of an inspector or inspectors is included in the new order, may I ask this question? Is it intended to continue with arrangements to make an appointment, or is it intended to use the Home Office inspectorate for this purpose? If an appointment is to be made, what specialist knowledge and expertise will such an appointee be required to possess; and why is that point not included in the article?

I referred to the absence of provision for a public inquiry on matters relating to the establishment scheme. I note that Article 51 refers to inquiries, but there is a difference from Section 33 of the Fire Service Act 1947 as it applies to Great Britain. That provides for public inquiries. Article 51 refers to "local or other inquiries". It does not include the word "public". Clarification is needed here. What is the Government's intention with regard to the possibility of holding public inquiries where they seem to be appropriate; and could Article 51 be used for an inquiry or investigation into a particular incident or a particular outbreak of fire?

The 1969 Northern Ireland Act included provisions for the establishment of a fire service advisory council similar to the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council in Great Britain. But by referring to Schedule 5 of the new order we see that these provisions—that is, Section 32 and Schedule 4—are repealed. This will leave the Fire Authority for Northern Ireland without a specific advisory body to deal with standards of appliances, equipment, procedures and similar matters.

I understand that the advisory council was never actually appointed. There was mutual agreement that the work of such an advisory council would be repetitive of that established in Great Britain. However, can the House be assured—this is the important point—that in the absence of provision for an advisory council within this order, the department and the fire authority, together with its brigade, will continue to accept and maintain Great Britain's Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council standards and recommendations? We note also that Schedule 5 repeals Article 6 of the Fire Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1973, especially the addendum to paragraph (b)of Section 16 of the main Act of 1969. That protected the standards of terms and conditions of employment of personnel. If we give praise to the Northern Ireland fire personnel, we ought to ensure that their standards of employment and conditions are properly observed.

In the light of the repeals I have mentioned, we need a definitive statement from the Minister. I am certain he will agree that the firemen of Northern Ireland must be treated no less favourably than their colleagues in Great Britain. Can the House be assured that the department, the fire authority and the brigade will accept standards and recommendations of the National Joint Council for Local Authorities' Fire Brigades and will continue the Northern Ireland Fire Authority's membership of that body?

Reference is also made to Article 10, where the Assembly has urged that the word "may" should be changed to "shall". This is on the question of a pension scheme. I note also that the Assembly urged that retained personnel shall be included in a pension scheme. The DoE and the Fire Brigades Union are in complete agreement that matters such as this should be considered on a Great Britain basis, applicable also to Northern Ireland. There is also at present a pension scheme for whole-time personnel, so that particular question is somewhat academic. However, the Fire Brigades Union points out that it tabled a proposal for a pension scheme for retained personnel. That matter was involved in a court action and therefore has been sub judice; but I should be very grateful if the noble Lord could say what is the present situation.

The last point I have to raise concerns Part III of the order, which deals with fire precautions. As the noble Lord has done, we welcome the fact that these points are included. My advisers on this issue have studied this order and the provisions for fire precautions along with the Great Britain legislation. I am told that there are a number of omissions and differences; and there is one example in particular. Article 27 is identical, word for word, with Section 6 of the Great Britain legislation, but with one important exception. Subparagraph (f) of the Great Britain legislation is left out of the Northern Ireland article. I quote: In the case of factory premises, particulars as to any explosive or highly flammable materials which may be stored or used in the premises". I am assured that this is a very important matter in relation to the contents of the fire certificate, the issue of which was referred to by the noble Lord in his opening statement. Can the Minister explain why this important point is left out of Article 27?

In conclusion, can the Minister also say whether or not there are any provisions in the Great Britain legislation on fire precautions which are not included in this order, which may mean that the provisions for Northern Ireland are less favourable than those for Great Britain? When the Assembly considered the issue of fire certificates, they raised the question of occasional entertainment letting of premises which are used for worship. While the Assembly recognised that the fire risk concerning premises used mainly for worship is rather low, there is a possible danger where the question of occasional entertainment activities is concerned. The DoE's view is that this is a matter which ought to be considered as being applicable to the whole of Great Britain; and it is a point that I can accept. However, in addition to considering this matter in particular, the Assembly recommended that the Government should examine the adequacy of legislation regarding the granting of entertainment licences, particularly occasional licences. I therefore ask the Minister whether this is to be done.

I apologise for having taken up time, but as we cannot amend this order, and as the personnel represented through the Fire Brigades Union are agitated about some of those points, any information that the Minister can give in reply and any assurances that he can give in answer to those requested will be important.