AM (Cabinet Secretary
for Local Government and Public Services): However, let
me be very clear that under no circumstances am I prepared to
transfer control of the service to
Police and Crime Commissioners, as is
happening in England. I do not either intend to alter the current
pattern of three fire and rescue authorities or amend their
existing boundaries. As we have seen across the border, those
approaches create more problems than they would resolve...
AM:... That's a model that, as I recall,
you defended when the UK Government was
proposing Police and Crime Commissioners, using
almost identical words at that time. You say that will mean
fire and rescue authority membership becoming more streamlined
and transparent, and budgets needing proper scrutiny and
approval. Well, thankfully, the fire and rescue authorities are
transparent with their meeting documentation, which is surely a
valid point when considering their current governance and
finance arrangements. The report from the chief fire officer in
north Wales to their fire authority on 17 September referred to
key issues set out in a letter to fire and rescue authority
chairs in February by you for the meeting the three chairs had
with you at the end of April, to your then engagement of
Professor Catherine Farrell of the University of South Wales
and Professor Rachel Ashworth at Cardiff University, to
speak with representatives of the fire rescue authorities and
the WLGA, and that their report was submitted to you. And the
report from the deputy chief officer of South Wales Fire
and Rescue Authority in September to his or her authority
attached a summary feedback drawn from the meetings held with
the fire and rescue authority chairs, chiefs and additional
personnel and the WLGA. How, therefore, do you respond to the
findings in that report that chiefs and chairs are not
resistant to change, and provided many examples of how they
embraced it, but they raised a series of concerns regarding the
suggestion that fire and rescue governance in Wales might be
reformed?
AM (Cabinet Secretary
for Local Government and Public Services): Let me
say this: we have, as the Member has indicated, shall I say, had
a very long conversation with both the current chairs and
the chief officers as we've moved through this process. And
I have, over the last year or so, sought to develop a
debate, with the chairs particularly, over the need for
reform and the shape that that reform will take. I introduced the
academic element to that on the basis of an attempt to shape
and to allow the development of their own thoughts on some of
these issues. And let me say this: this is a White Paper, and it
is a White Paper that seeks views on particular proposals, but it
is not a White Paper that rules out alternatives. In fact, were
the Member to take the time to read the White Paper in any
detail, then he would see that, in the White Paper itself,
we do take the time to say that if there are other proposals,
other suggestions, other recommendations for reform, then
we're very happy to take that forward and to consider those
additional proposals. At no time in this process have I ruled in
or ruled out any alternative measures or any alternative
suggestions, with the exception of a national force, a
national brigade, and also a transfer of responsibility to
the
Police and Crime
Commissioners. Those are the two options I've ruled out,
but I've not ruled out other options. If the Conservative
spokesperson does have any suggestions he wishes us to consider,
then I'm more than happy to give due consideration to those
issues...
To read all the exchanges,
CLICK
HERE
