APPENDIX 1
FIRE AND RESCUE – MODEL FOR CHANGE - OUTCOME OF
CONSULTATION
5 JULY TO 5 SEPTEMBER
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The majority of stakeholders who took part in the consultation understood the
rationale for the proposed changes needed to modernise the Fire and Rescue
Service. It was broadly understood that limited resources would need to be
utilised differently to be more efficient and effective. Stakeholders welcomed
the Isle of Wight Council’s investment and commitment to improve service
provision. There was also support for the creation of additional full time firefighter jobs.
However, there was overwhelming support to retain Yarmouth Fire Station.
The public meeting held in Yarmouth was attended by over 60 people and
over 300 letters of objection were received.
INTRODUCTION
The Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service (IWFRS) are undergoing a radical
modernisation process aimed at improving public safety whilst enhancing its
efficiency and effectiveness as a service within the Isle of Wight Council
(IWC). The Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, through the Fire and Rescue
Service National Framework, puts the responsibility for assessing risk and
planning to reduce risk to an acceptable level within available resources firmly
on individual Fire and Rescue Authorities.
The IWFRS relies heavily a Retained Duty System (RDS) to support, or
replace, fulltime personnel at incidents. There are areas of the Isle of Wight
where the fulltime crews are unable to attend within the target response times
and in these cases it is critical that local resilience is reliable. Occasions
when this is not the case are increasing and it is therefore necessary to
provide alternative options for consideration.
BACKGROUND
Phase one of the ‘Model for Change’ project was to assess the future strategy
of the Fire and Rescue Service on the Isle of Wight. The prime objective is to
optimise the operational resources on the Island to provide a smaller, welltrained, appropriately rewarded workforce that engages with the community to
manage and reduce risk efficiently.
Set against a background in previous years of poor performance and the
possibility of combination with a neighbouring service, it is critical that the
Island’s Service has the resilience to overcome the disadvantages of
separation by sea and the limitations posed by the Island’s geographical and
demographical profile.
Recent Audit Commission assessments have resulted in the IWFRS being
scored as ‘improving well’ under direction of travel and three out of four for its
service assessment. The Use of Resources score of two is based on that of
the overall assessment of the council. It is recognised that this forward
direction of travel can only be sustained by realigning the resources to ensure
E-8
the Service is best placed to meet its responsibilities under the National
Framework.
A project board was convened to study the case for change and decide on the
best option to present to cabinet. The criteria for this decision was based on
operational resilience and value for money.
The Project Board assessed all options and agreed that Option Five afforded
the highest level of resilience balanced against the financial analysis. This
was presented to the cabinet on 20 April 2009.
The cabinet instructed the Chief Fire Officer to undertake a full public
consultation to start not before July 2009 and that the consultation process
takes into account the potential for an increased risk profile if Yarmouth
Bridge is closed, when considering the future of Yarmouth Station.
METHODOLOGY
It is essential to engage with a sufficiently wide group of stakeholders to
enable all those who wish to take the opportunity to understand the
implications, raise any concerns, or make any comment. This process was
managed through the production of a Stakeholder Management Plan with the
following aims:
•
•
•
•
•
Identify all those Stakeholders who could potentially be affected by the
outcomes of the Model for Change.
Identify all those Stakeholders who could potentially be affected by the
process of achieving the project outcomes.
Reduce the potential risks, e.g. the risk of misinformation during the
process that might cause delays or significant issues to achieving the
required outcome;
Gain the input of controlling and influential groups to expedite robust
decision making.
Ensure there is a robust communication plan for keeping stakeholders
informed during the implementation stages.
It is important that requirements of all stakeholders are analysed in order that
change interventions can be designed to either gain or keep their support, or
at least reduce the level of resistance to proposed changes.
For the Stakeholder Management Plan to be successful a degree of
stakeholder engagement will be required. This will vary by individual and role
– some stakeholders will be responsible or accountable for aspects of delivery
of the project outcomes; others will need to be consulted as part of the
decision-making and planning processes. A much wider group will need to be
informed of process, points of consideration, decisions and the implications of
those decisions. An equality impact assessment on the consultation has
been undertaken – attached in Annex H.
As the project progresses the nature and range of options (and stakeholders),
issues and decisions that need to be addressed will vary from design into full
implementation and transition.
E-9
The Stakeholder Management Plan is in 3 Parts:
Part 1
Identification of Key Stakeholders
Part 2
Communications/Consultation Plan
• Objectives
• Aims
• Methods of Communication (Internal and External)
Part 3:
Action Plan for delivery of consultation
Assessment of effectiveness
PART 1
Identification of Key Stakeholders
It was important to cover all areas within the Isle of Wight and those additional
stakeholders who will be included from a Regional and National perspective.
It will not be possible to reach everyone individually therefore a system of
information cascading will be utilised whenever appropriate. In these cases
care will be taken to ensure the quality and accuracy of information
throughout the dissemination process.
Internal Stakeholders:
Isle of Wight Council: Leader; Cabinet Member for Safer Communities;
Policy Member for Safer Communities; Policy Team; Full Council; Chief
Executive Officer; Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods;
Heads of Service; and areas within the council that will have a direct
(or indirect) contribution and/or implication, e.g. HR, Property Services.
Fire and Rescue Service staff: Chief Fire Officer; Principal Officers;
Strategic Management Team Tactical Managers’ Group; Fire Control
Staff; Support Staff; Training Centre Staff; Whole-time Duty System
Staff; and Retained Duty System Staff.
Employee Representatives: Unison; Fire Brigades Union (FBU); and
Retained Firefighters’ Union (RFU).
External Stakeholders:
Local: General Public: Partner Agencies; Media; Third Sector
organisations; businesses; other emergency services; Parish Councils;
Town Councils; Public Representation Groups; Local Resilience Forum
(LRF); Island Resilience Forum (IRF); and Island Strategic Partnership
(ISP).
Regional: South East Region Fire and Rescue Services; and
Government Office of the South East (GOSE).
National: Communities and Local Government Department (CLG);
Audit Commission; and Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA).
E - 10
PART 2
Communications/Consultation Plan
Once stages 1 – 3 have been completed the Communications Plan will be
initiated.
Objectives
• Ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the reasons for the Model for
Change and how it will affect their day-to-day lives.
• State the priorities and the resources required to achieve the outcomes.
• Answer any questions and address the concerns of individual groups.
• Address issues of misinformation and/or conjecture that could have a
detrimental affect on the progress of the IRMP.
• Ensure our proposals meet with the perceived requirements of the
community whilst meeting our statutory responsibilities.
Aims
For this plan to be truly effective it is important that all attempts are made to:
• Be proactive, open and honest with the facts at every identified stage of
the IRMP.
• Publish material relating to the IRMP as quickly as possible so it is easily
available to all relevant stakeholders.
• Value, support and motivate those directly affected by the IRMP, e.g. Staff,
Partners
• Make identified stakeholders aware of the consequences of change.
• Limit the potential for rumour by proactively ‘filling information voids’.
• Constantly review level of awareness and reassess communications plan
as appropriate.
• Build on the information set out in Part 1 of the Stakeholder Management
Plan in order to identify the most effective channel of communication,
relevant to message and delivery timeframe.
• Ensure all communications are delivered in accordance with the
requirements of the target audience.
• Deliver effective processes for two-way communications to enhance
feedback and review mechanisms.
Methods of Communication
Internal
The aim is to ensure all staff and Members receive information from Isle of
Wight Fire and Rescue Service before they hear or see news in the press or
from other sources. Effective internal communication will ensure that staff are
informed of the facts and the consequences of this information.
Communication Channels (not a definitive list)
• Isle of Wight Council Intranet
• Managers’ briefings/presentations
• Team Meetings
• Questions and Answers
• The Vine
E - 11
•
•
•
Members’ Bulletin
Routine Notice
E-mail
External
• Isle of Wight Council website
• IWFRS website
• Press releases – County Press, Isle of Wight Radio, Solent Radio, etc…
• Press briefings
• Questions and Answers
• One Island
• Letters
• E-mails
• Other mailings
• Information to special interest groups
• Information to representative groups
• Public Meetings
PART 3
Action Plan for delivery of consultation: Timescale – 5 July to 5
September
The Fire and Rescue Service and the council’s Communications Team
developed a publicity plan commencing on 8 June. The timetable was as
follows:
Date
5 June
8 June
15 June
w/c 29
June
1 July
2 July
5 July
9 July
15 July
17 July
w/c 20
July
5 Sept
Action
Public Meetings arranged
Copy submitted for ‘One Island’
Meetings with Web team
Mail shot to Town and Parish Councils, Partners, Diversity
Groups. Voluntary Groups, Harbourmasters etc…
Information added to websites (council and FRS)
Copy for advertisement In ‘Island Business’ submitted
Dates of staff and public meetings announced in Fire and
Rescue Service Routine Notice
Consultation period start
Consultation information in Vine and Bulletin
Mail shot to all Island Businesses inviting to Business Breakfast
Meeting
Half-page advertisement in County Press announcing Meeting
Dates
Chief Fire Officer interviewed on IOW Radio
Daily Radio campaign starts.
Consultation period ends
E - 12
CONSUTLATION EVENTS AND OUTCOMES
A media campaign, which include press, radio and a direct mail shot,
commenced in early June 2009, regarding the ‘Model for Change’ Project
consultation, which began on 5 July 2009, inviting stakeholders to have their
say in the modernisation plans for the Fire and Rescue Service. 910
businesses were invited to Business Breakfast on 11 August 2009, held at the
Riverside Centre, Newport.
A schedule of public meetings held, with question and answer sessions, are
set out below.
Date
Venue
Monday 20
July
Newport Public
Consultation
Newport Football Club,
St George’s Park,
Medina Way,
Newport
Shanklin Public
Consultation
Gatten and Lake
Primary School,
15, Howard Road,
Shanklin
Sandown Public
Consultation
The Broadway Centre,
1, The Broadway,
Sandown
Tuesday 21
July
Wednesday
22 July
Monday 27
July
Yarmouth Public
Consultation
Yarmouth Primary
School,
Mill Road, Yarmouth
Number
attending
2 people
No questions raised.
6 people
No questions raised.
10 people
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ cost of keeping Shanklin Fire Station open;
ƒ risks associated with closing or retaining Shanklin Fire
Station;
ƒ Fire Control; and
ƒ proposed Bay Fire Station.
(See Annex A for specific questions raised).
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ who is responsible for initiatives these changes;
ƒ risk profile associated with Yarmouth and Freshwater;
ƒ resilience and competency;
ƒ firefighter recruitment;
ƒ staffing numbers;
ƒ working patterns – time spend fire fighting and dealing
with road traffic accidents;
ƒ financial implications;
ƒ location of potential West Wight Fire Station;
ƒ turnout times;
ƒ RDS redundancies / transfers;
ƒ keeping Shanklin Fire Station open;
ƒ cost of keeping Yarmouth Fire Station open;
ƒ building a new West Wight Fire Station before closing
Yarmouth;
ƒ road and bridge closures and response times;
ƒ additional fire appliance bay at Freshwater;
ƒ risk associated with being a ferry port;
ƒ ability to deal with more than one incident;
ƒ population density;
ƒ consideration of industries and future developments;
ƒ responding to incidents in Brighstone;
ƒ questionable mileage and response times provided;
ƒ staff morale at Yarmouth;
ƒ verification of figures provided;
60+ people
Summary of public questions raised
E - 13
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Tuesday 28
July
Ventnor Public
Consultation
The Winter Gardens,
Pier Street, Ventnor
7 people
Wednesday
29 July
Ryde Public
Consultation
The Council Chamber,
Ryde Town Hall, Lind
Street,
Ryde
Business Breakfast
Meeting
Riverside Centre,
Newport
7 people
Tuesday 11
August
15 people
accepted
and 8
people
attended
staff training;
upgrading existing stations instead of building new;
capital receipt from sale of building;
new fire station at Newport – location;
cost of commissioning architects;
cabinet consultation with Yarmouth residents;
closure of Yarmouth Primary School, Youth Club, Fire
Station;
ƒ road traffic accidents; and
ƒ decision to retain IoW FRS and not move to Hampshire
FRS.
(See Annex B for specific questions raised).
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ risk classifications;
ƒ number of time pump is off the run;
ƒ cost associated with retaining Shanklin Fire Station;
ƒ who makes final decision;
ƒ use of data by Project Board in making their
recommendation;
ƒ location of pumps;
ƒ day / night response times; and
ƒ turn out from Newport Fire Station.
(See Annex C for specific questions raised).
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ cost of using / putting Hampshire FRS on standby;
ƒ cost of running IOW FRS;
ƒ density of population and buildings; and
ƒ road traffic accidents.
(See Annex D for specific questions raised).
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ RDS at Sandown;
ƒ Chief Fire Officer’s view of retaining Shanklin Fire
Station;
ƒ turn out time from Sandown to Shanklin;
ƒ use of capital receipt from sale of land; and
ƒ access to information relating to venerable people.
(See Annex E for specific questions raised).
Invitations were sent out to 54 Third Sector organisations and to all Town and
Parish Councils, offering to attend one of their meetings, should they be
unable to attend any of the public consultation events.
Copies of the presentations delivered at the public consultation events can be
found at https://wightnet.iow.gov.uk/
Running alongside the consultation meetings for the public, meetings were
also held for all members of staff in IWFRS the first held on 6 July 2009, with
the last taking place on 11 August 2009. Venues included every fire station,
covering every watch at Newport Fire Station, and two meetings at HQ to
ensure all staff were given an opportunity to attend. Question and answer
sessions were held after each presentation and the questions raised by staff
are shown in Annex F.
E - 14
A schedule of staff meetings are set out in table below.
Date
Monday 6 July
Tuesday 7 July
Wednesday 8 July
Friday 10 July
Monday 13 July
Wednesday 15 July
Tuesday 28 July
Monday 3 August
Tuesday 4 August
Monday 10 August
Monday 10 August
Location
Newport - Red Watch
Newport - Retained
Newport - White Watch
Shanklin
Sandown
HQ and SLDC. Session 1
Newport - Blue Watch
Ryde
Newport - Green Watch
Ventnor
Bembridge
HQ and SLDC. Session 2
East Cowes
Freshwater
Cowes
Yarmouth
Summary of staff questions raised
Questions raised relating to:
ƒ recruitment;
ƒ prevention activities;
ƒ delays in arrival of 2nd pumping appliance;
ƒ RDS migration policy;
ƒ financial cuts
ƒ access to detailed costing;
ƒ allocation of appliances;
ƒ flexible work patterns;
ƒ political decision making and officer professional
recommendations;
ƒ relocation packages
ƒ redundancy process and timetable;
ƒ barriers to delaying / stopping the project;
ƒ structure of day crewing system;
ƒ outcome if politicians go against officers recommendations;
ƒ informing public that splitting A6 /A7 puts strain on service;
ƒ employee cost;
ƒ number of RDS lost;
ƒ affordability;
ƒ staffing levels;
ƒ split cover;
ƒ recruitment and selection of RDS;
ƒ training and development;
ƒ turn out times and timed runs;
ƒ cost of employing Project Manager;
ƒ cost of keeping stations is minimal;
ƒ decision making rationale for closing/retaining stations;
ƒ management structure; and
ƒ taking redundancy and applying for another job within the
service.
(See Annex F for specific questions raised).
Members of the public were then given an opportunity to make their views
known by letter or e-mail. The consultation period ended on 5 September
2009. During this time 305 letters were received regarding the proposal to
close Yarmouth Fire Station. The majority of these were photocopies of a
letter, signed by local residents. These were all responded to with a
personally addressed and signed letter from the Chief Fire Officer (see Annex
G for generic letter and response).
The comments / issues raised in the 305 generic letters received are
summarised as:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
strong objection to proposed station closure following 70 years of
service by local retained Firefighters;
retention of station is a high priority in Yarmouth Community Plan;
serious reservations regarding fire cover, particularly when bridge is
closed;
maintenance of Wilmingham Lane;
congestion in Yarmouth associated with ferry;
ability of Newport Fire Station being able to provide 100% cover is not
convincing, particularly if Newport personnel are already dealing with
an incident elsewhere;
E - 15
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
failure to recruit retained personnel;
justification for closure when financial cost of retaining station is
minimal;
loss of jobs; and
detrimental impact to safety and well-being of local residents;
reduction in overall numbers of Firefighters on the Island could leave
the Island seriously under resourced.
Some of the 305 generic letters received, raised additional comments /
issues. These additional comments / issues are summarised as:
ƒ concerns about timber/thatched buildings;
ƒ safety of the residents within care homes;
ƒ dangers to livestock from arson attacks;
ƒ lack of local knowledge;
ƒ distance / travel times from Newport and Freshwater;
ƒ cover provided by Newport is not convincing given that Cowes,
Shanklin and Ventnor will have only 1 pump;
ƒ closure is a short-sighted measure;
ƒ health and safety issue rather than a finance issue;
ƒ fire station must not be closed for financial gain/need to economise;
ƒ response time when bridge is closed/broken and issue of road works;
ƒ road links / Wilmingham Lane is narrow, winding and unsuitable for
fast response;
ƒ if it was necessary to build a fire station in Yarmouth this must still be
the case since the increase in buildings and population;
ƒ Yarmouth is a busy harbour and ferry port; and
ƒ queues of traffic in and around the harbour/bridge area during ferry
operating times.
Four other letters were received from Yarmouth residents which raised
objections to the proposed closure of Yarmouth Fire Station. (See Annex H for
letters and responses – personal information has been removed).
To allow for any possible delays occurring via the postal system, letters
received in the post on 7th and 8th September were also included. A further
21 letters have been received (to date) to which an acknowledgment has
been sent explaining that their views have been received too late to be
included in this consultation report.
CONCLUSIONS
The majority of stakeholders who took part in the consultation understood the
rationale for the proposed changes needed to modernise the Fire and Rescue
Service. It was broadly understood that limited resources would need to be
utilised differently to be more efficient and effective. Stakeholders welcomed
the Isle of Wight Council’s investment and commitment to improve service
provision. There was also support for the creation of additional full time
Firefighters jobs.
However, there was overwhelming support to retain Yarmouth Fire Station.
The public meeting held in Yarmouth was attended by over 60 people and
over 300 letters of objection were received.
E - 16
Annex:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Public questions and answers - Sandown
Public questions and answers - Yarmouth
Public questions and answers - Ventnor
Public questions and answers - Ryde
Public questions and answers – Business Breakfast
Staff questions and answers
Yarmouth generic letter and response
Yarmouth resident letters and responses
Click Here for Annexes A - F
Click Here for Annex G
Click Here for Annex H
E - 17