Agenda item

To consider the following motion received from Councillor J Legrys:

“Local Plan & Fire Services

It has recently been announced that the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Combined Fire Authority (CFA) are to consult on proposals for reductions to Leicestershire’s Fire and Rescue Service in Coalville and North West Leicestershire.

The North West Leicestershire draft Local Plan which calls for additional increase in housing, employment and retail in the plan period to the following numbers:

Minimum of 10,700 new homes

Additional 96 hectares of employment land

7,300 m² of retail

Approximately half of the draft Local Plan growth will be served or supported by Coalville Fire Station.

In its response to the CFA consultation this Council will:-

outline its proposed housing and economic growth to 2031 and

state that it would be inappropriate to downgrade or reduce services from Coalville & Ashby and any other Fire and Rescue Station serving North West Leicestershire Communities.”

Councillor J Legrys moved the following motion:

“It has recently been announced that the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland

Combined Fire Authority (CFA) are to consult on proposals for reductions to

Leicestershire’s Fire and Rescue Service in Coalville and North West

Leicestershire.

The North West Leicestershire draft Local Plan which calls for additional

increase in housing, employment and retail in the plan period to the following

numbers:

Minimum of 10,700 new homes

Additional 96 hectares of employment land

7,300 m2 of retail

Approximately half of the draft Local Plan growth will be served or supported

by Coalville Fire Station.

In its response to the CFA consultation this Council will:-

outline its proposed housing and economic growth to 2031 and

state that it would be inappropriate to downgrade or reduce services from

Coalville & Ashby and any other Fire and Rescue Station serving North West Leicestershire Communities.”

Councillor J Legrys spoke to the motion, referring to the recent events in Paris which demonstrated how vital and important the emergency services were.  He stated that the motion was simply asking the council to comment and write to the Fire Authority explaining how the Local Plan would increase housing and retail within the district, and that it would therefore be inappropriate to downgrade fire services.  He added that the district would grow quite significantly in the next 20 years and the emergency services needed to be able to deal with that.  He stated that he was not convinced the Fire Authority would be able to provide a response if it was downgraded as expected.  He stated that the community needed to be convinced that what was being proposed would provide the service that was expected.  He referred to a recent fire in a derelict building in Coalville, which required 5 fire fighters to put the fire out.  He felt that had the fire service been cut, the response would have taken a lot longer.  He added that fortunately there was no human loss last weekend.  He expressed concerns about the reductions not only in Coalville, but also in Loughborough and Hinckley, which would result in the fire service having to cover a much wider area.  He expressed concerns that with the growth in the Local Plan, people would have to take out private fire insurance, just like in Victorian times.

The motion was seconded by Councillor D Everitt.

Councillor N Clarke expressed support for the motion.  He made reference to the continuing cuts made by the government and added that difficult decisions needed to be made in respect of funding.  He commented that fire fighters would have to make even more difficult decisions if the proposals became reality.  He urged the Fire Authority follow David Cameron’s advice.

Councillor D Harrison stated that the whole concept of fire brigades and the work they did had to be taken into consideration.  He commented that there had been a dramatic reduction in emergency fires due to advances in modern day house building and therefore the demand upon the dire service had reduced.  He added that people and service would not be lost as a result of the proposals and he referred to the lack of interest from the general public at the open day.  He stated that he opposed the motion.

Councillor M Specht commented that he was pleased to see there had been approximately a 25% reduction in emergency calls in the last 5 years.  He added that hopefully in the coming years as the population grew and debt reduced, there would be more revenue coming in and services could be adjusted as appropriate.

Councillor R Johnson commented that the first duty of the government was the protection of the realm in today’s volatile society.  He referred to the number of major accidents on our motorways and expressed anger at the proposals to cut the number of fire fighters, as they were relied upon to protect all people.  He commented that the fire and emergency services ought to be expanded because they were relied upon.

Councillor R Blunt referred to the 42% reduction in the number of instances of fire in the last 10 years.  He commented that the world had changed in 10 years and the fire service had to change with it.  He added that the proposals were led by the chief fire officer which he would be opposing the motion.  He stated that he believed that a disservice had been done to the country by retaining this level of protection, and the system now needed to catch up.

Councillor D Everitt commented that the motion is about ensuring the safety of the community, both now and in future. 

Councillor T J Pendleton raised a point of order, as Councillor D Everitt had not reserved his comments and he would like to make a statement.

The Chairman agreed that Councillor T J Pendleton could address the meeting after Councillor D Everitt had concluded his comments.

Councillor D Everitt accepted the argument that fires were not as frequent, however he did not believe this was the case in respect of accidents on motorways and other services that were not fire related.  He added that the fire service was also undertaking a lot of prevention and training.  He added that when you have a fire, a quick response was wanted.  He added that that the fire service was an insurance policy and the fact that there was less demand for the service did not diminish its importance.  He stated that 30 years ago he was a retained fire fighter at Hinckley and he knew speed was essential to stop fires, and a skilled fire service was needed to go where others couldn’t.  He stated that the fire service was crucial, and cutting fire stations when there was a massive growth in front of us was ridiculous.  He urged members to think again, for safety’s sake.

Councillor T J Pendleton stated that he wanted to address the motion before members which dealt with fire cover in North West Leicestershire.  He referred to the consultation which had been undertaken and the plan laid out by the chief fire officer which gave a guaranteed response time.  He acknowledged that this was an emotive area.  He advised that the review undertaken by the chief fire officer had taken into account the 42% reduction over 10 years, and therefore replacing 1 of the 2 fire tenders at Coalville fire station with a tactical response vehicle, he felt was a prudent response.  He added that additional cover had been provided at Castle Donington, which had been placed specifically to support the M1, A50 and A42.  He felt that with this additional cover, response times would be maintained, and this assurance had indeed been given.  He urged members not to condemn the chief fire officer’s plan, but to support it.  He added that he would be voting against the motion.

Councillor J Legrys exercised his right of reply and made expressed displeasure with regards to Councillor D Harrison’s comments.  

Councillor D Harrison objected strongly to Councillor J Legrys’ comments. 

The Chairman directed Councillor J Legrys to direct his comments to the right of reply.

Councillor J Legrys stated that he felt the issue was simple.  He asked that the community be convinced that this district will be covered in the event of a fire.  He requested a recorded vote.

The Chairman then put the motion to the vote.

A recorded vote having been requested, the voting was as follows:

For the motion:

Councillors R Adams, R Canny, N Clarke, D Everitt, F Fenning, R Johnson, J Legrys, S McKendrick, T Neilson and M B Wyatt (10).

Against the motion:

Councillors R Ashman, R D Bayliss, R Blunt, J Bridges, R Boam, J Clarke, J Cotterill, J G Coxon, S Gillard, T Gillard, L Goacher, D Harrison, G Hoult, J Hoult, G Jones, K Merrie, T J Pendleton, P Purver, V Richichi, N J Rushton, A V Smith and M Specht (22).

Abstentions:

Councillor A C Saffell (1).

The motion was declared LOST.