1.

ATTENDANCE:

Cllr Robin McIntosh (RM)

SDO Mark Raynor, Chair (MR)

DO Rod Hammerton (RH)

Cllr Keith Chapman (KC) 2^nd part only

APOLOGIES:

Cllr Baulk

Cllr Cartwright

Cllr Chapman (notice of late arrival)

2.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

Approved by RM

3.

MATTERS ARISING

3.1

It was agreed that an invitation should be made to members to spend a day with CFS as a personal acquaint.

Action: MR to place in Dec/Jan members update

3.2

It was agreed for Item 5 to be rolled over to the next meeting for consideration when more members were present.

4.

IRMP3 (06) PROPOSALS

MR presented the IRMP3 - V2 document covering the main strands of planned CFS activity and comments were invited.

4.1

HFSC

Discussion took place over whether it was appropriate to have an aspirational target rather than one which was realistically achievable. RM felt that if the Service were unable to reach a target of every household in Hampshire having smoke detection by 2010 the target should be reviewed. It was agreed a review might be appropriate at some stage to refine the broad target.

4.2

SCHOOLS EDUCATION

Recognition was given to the fact that this area of work was successful but now faced the challenge of considering accidents more broadly, particularly in the area of Road Safety. RM felt the Service should work with the HCC Road Safety Team to see where HFRS can improve/support current work.

Action: RH to liaise with HCC Road Safety Team

4.3

YOUTH DIVERSION ACTIVITY

MR explained the plan to work with the Youth Offending Team (YOT) to use the Fire-setter Intervention Programme for rehabilitation. It was felt that using resources in a highly formed way would achieve large results.

There was then discussion about the way Youth Diversion programmes were having effect on HFRS corporate aims and those of Local Authorities. For example the total cost of a single car fire can be over £6K.

However it was recognised that on occasions it was difficult to find a direct correlation that supported corporate aims with this type of endeavour.

4.4

OLDER PEOPLE

MR explained Merseyside success in employing an Older Persons Advocate to work at gaining access to this particular group. Discussion took place about what an older person actually is and whether the advocate needed to be from that age group. RM felt this may be worth putting to the committee.

It was recognised that risk increases with age so further discussion took place on how referrals for Home Fire Safety Checks (HFSCs) could be gained for those most at risk. MR explained the Service was currently forming partnerships with Primary Care Trusts (PCTs). RM felt this would leave gaps and felt it would be valuable to look at Social Services as a means of gaining referrals.

Action: RH to consider

4.5

ARSON

It was explained that the Service has entered into Local Public Service Agreements with Portsmouth City Council and Hampshire County Council to reduce deliberate fires. We have agreed `stretch targets' with the ODPM that should reduce arson crime and improve communities.

4.6

ROAD SAFETY

The Services responsibility for taking preventative action with regards to matters other than fire was re-iterated. It was recognised that the Service's real expertise was immediately post collision. KC reminded the group how effective the arts can be in selling a powerful message. A good partnership DVD could be produced to explain about the hazards caused by young and newly qualified drivers.

Action: RH to investigate

4.7

DOMESTIC SPRINKLERS

MR explained that the Service continues to work with builders and Housing Authorities to promote domestic sprinklers. Consideration was being made to running an event for Housing Associations in the new year. A request was made to hold the event of a Friday to allow participation of MP's. Discussion then took place over the need to sell sprinklers on the basis of the cost effectiveness of adequate fire protection over the cost of installation and maintenance. Perhaps consider over a 10-year period.

Action: MR

5.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

5.1

Arson has continued to reduce.

5.2

It was explained there were new indicators which related to the % of houses that the Fire Service were called to which actually had smoke detectors. It was recognised this was a very useful indicator of progress. It was also recognised that the BVI that measured activation of detectors could be used a measure of cultural change.

5.3

The problems of recording current levels of activity were discussed. It was explained the problem was believed to be in recording problems rather than actual levels of activity.

5.4

MR explained that the Service is funnelling as much money as possible to the HFSC regime.

MR explained that there would be central funding for the provision of HFSC of:

05/06 - £147K

06/07 - £147K

07/08 - £300K

RM raised the issue of when the Service has achieved its aim of providing detection in every house in Hampshire what will be the next strategy. Will it be incumbent on the Service to then have a programme of planned maintenance and replacement of smoke detectors, or do the individual homeowners take responsibility thus allowing the Fire Service to focus on other areas of prevention. It was recognised that there will always be a need for HFSCs but the ultimate goal must be to provoke a cultural change in people's attitudes to personal safety.

6.

USE OF RETAINED DUTY SYSTEM FIREFIGHTERS

There was an explanation of the difficulty in using RDS for CFS because they are only actually contracted for emergency response. However it was recognised that RDS accounts for 75% of stations, 50% of staff and a greater part of the geographical mass and this meant there was a need for RDS to be able to carry out HFSCs.

It was explained the two biggest stumbling blocks were deciding at what rate individuals should be paid at and whether the current practice Grey Book staff carrying the checks out in pairs was financially viable when extended to the RDS. Discussion took place around appropriate risk assessments and control measures to support lone working. MR pointed out that the Service employs Green Book staff to carry out HFSCs as lone workers already without mishap.

Overall support was agreed on the basis that engaging the RDS staff in this way gives benefits regarding local knowledge recruitment and retention. It was however recognised that if this endeavour is not achievable due to too high a resistance. Other options for carrying out HFSCs on retained station grounds must be considered.

7.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

None.

8.

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

31 March 2006 at 11.00 - 13.00 hours