The next item on the agenda is a discussion with the national fire brigade committee of SIPTU on national emergency and disaster planning. Relevant briefing documents from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government were circulated prior to the meeting. I welcome Mr. Michael Halpenny, Mr. Stephen Brady, Mr. Tony McDonnell and Mr. Brian Murray who will make a brief presentation which will be followed by a question and answer session with members. I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
National Emergency and Disaster Planning: Presentation.
Mr. Michael Halpenny
With the indulgence of the Chair, I will make some introductory remarks before handing over to Mr. Brady who will make the presentation. I thank the joint committee for affording us the opportunity to address it. We wrote to it to express our concern about emergency planning and the concept of civil protection in the 21st century, a subject on which we held a conference in Killarney in November 2005. We have specific concerns about the major emergency management framework document issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in November 2005, the focus of the submission to be made by Mr. Brady. Mr. Tony McDonnell, who is involved on the health and safety steering committee in the fire service change programme, and Mr. Brian Murray, who is involved in the risk assessment steering committee, are expert in operations in their fields and will be happy to deal with any questions directed at those specific areas.
Mr. Stephen Brady
By way of introduction, SIPTU represents the vast majority of fire fighters and fire officers in the Irish fire service at both local and national level. We appreciate the opportunity to make a presentation and have circulated a document to be issued to members. My colleagues and I are very experienced in dealing with fires, both large and small, transportation issues, especially road traffic accidents, chemical and environmental incidents, as well as terrorist related cases.
The review of the 1984 document was long overdue. While the new framework document is welcome, we have a number of concerns, particularly about the lack of consultation, a matter which has high priority. Our major concern is that there has been little or no consultation with representatives of personnel who will be on the front line in the response to any emergency incident. Access to the latest draft document was denied to our members, in spite of the fact that we had requested it. In fact, we may not have seen the document from the Department circulated to members. This is difficult to comprehend, given that we purport to live in an era of partnership, consultation and co-operation.
Let me quote from the first draft document which our members have seen and which we presume has been incorporated into later documents. It states: "This document has been prepared on the basis of consultation with interested parties and consideration has been given to the outcome of that consultation. The final draft framework will be put forward to the Government."
We believe the constituency we represent is an interested party and would argue that we should be considered as key stakeholders in major emergency management. This is a key issue for us which is critically important.
The issues mentioned in the framework document make no sense if the necessary legislation is not put in place to help provide resources, equipment and training. The absence of legislation means Departments may not provide the agencies involved with these resources. That has been our experience.
We welcome the clarity that the declaration of a lead agency will bring to incidents requiring multi-agency resources. This should provide a more effective and co-ordinated response to large-scale incidents. However, we have some concerns as to the methodology employed to determine the most suitable agency for the management of some emergency incidents. An example is road traffic accidents with persons trapped requiring extraction. We do not have to be reminded of the grave situation regarding road traffic accidents. There is a concept relating to this known in the services as the "golden hour" which we may get an opportunity to explain later. The nomination of the lead agency in the case of river rescue is also of concern to us. Our concern relates to rescue occurring, as opposed to recovery. The issue of hazardous materials, including bio hazards, is also causing anxiety, perhaps raising the possibility of a terrorist threat. We could not identify a methodology in any of the aforementioned areas other than, perhaps, a pin being stuck in a piece of paper.
The creation of emergency management groups at regional level should lead to a much greater degree of co-operation and more effective use of resources, equipment and combined inter-agency participation in training exercises and so forth. We have some serious reservations, however, with regard to the risk assessment process that will have to be undertaken. The document states: "In assessing the likelihood of a hazardous event occurring, it is intended to draw from the expertise and judgement of people involved in the field". If we are not the people in the field, I do not know who are.
This invites a number of obvious questions. What competencies are considered necessary for those engaged in the process of conducting the risk assessments? Who signs off on the outcome of the risk assessment? Where there is a dispute between agencies in relation to the outcome of a risk assessment, for example, the likelihood of a particular disaster occurring, who adjudicates? A key requirement for the success of the process at regional level will be consultation with all stakeholders in emergency incident management, of which fire-fighters are a pivotal element.
The use of common language and terminology is a prerequisite for effective communications and understanding between agencies at any multi-agency incident. Clear, concise and accurate information is essential. Within the EU, the term "civil protection" is used to denote emergency incidents of a major nature and this is referred to in the proposed draft document. Given the recognition within the document of the need for the use of common language across agencies and services, and in more recent times across borders, it is unclear why the EU norm has not been adopted in this process. The decision to deviate from the terminology used by our colleagues in the emergency services in Northern Ireland appears unnecessary, given the fact that our proposed framework so closely reflects the major incident management plan for Northern Ireland.
An analysis of the training implications, the provision of equipment, resources and the necessary funding needs to be undertaken if the principle emergency response providers are to meet their obligations with regard to the aims of the proposed framework document. We also believe it is essential that those personnel likely to be involved in the response to any major emergency are also involved in the development and preparation of a plan for such events. If we fail to prepare, we prepare to fail and muddled planning leads to a muddled response.
However, it is important to stress that there is a way forward with this. In our opinion, if this proposed major emergency management framework document is to be accepted by those who are the primary responders when such an emergency incident occurs, the minimum we should expect is that we are consulted and that our views are factored into the decision-making process, prior to the final document being presented to and adopted as policy by Government. My colleagues and I are available to elaborate on any of the above.
I welcome the members of SIPTU and their submission. I am taken aback. I am not sure which draft of the document we have here; it is dated November 2005 and it states that the Garda, the Health Service Executive and local authorities are all involved in this. As part of the local authority structure the fire brigade should be a key element and I support Mr. Brady's contention that it ought to have been consulted. I am surprised and cannot understand why it was not. When you say there was little or no consultation, what does the word "little" imply?
Mr. Brady
It implies there was very little. I understand that this document was prepared in November 2004 and a year of preparation and development took place involving inter-agency participation. A chief fire officer and an assistant chief fire officer would have been part of that process. In November 2005 I attended a presentation in the Custom House as a member of the Fire Service Council at which the document was shown. There was a three to four week period during which people could contribute to the document. This was insufficient for us as fire fighters' representatives. However, at a person to person level, I met a member of the fire service department once. That is what the word "little" implies in "little or no consultation". When we sought access to the document subsequent to our input we were denied.
It makes sense that your views should be taken on board. Has the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, been contacted about this?
Mr. Halpenny
I wrote to the Minister, Deputy Roche, on 24 November asking to meet in connection with the document. My rationale was the same as that outlined by Mr. Brady. We represent 90% of the front line people who will be involved in this. We also wrote to Mr. Lillis, the principal officer involved. If there is a revised draft of the document, we have not received it and no meeting has taken place.
We should pass this on immediately to the Minister and the people in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government who are responsible. We are not experts in this field. We should ensure that the people working in this area, those at the cutting edge, whether they are in a union or not, are consulted. If these people are not on board then this is not the best possible plan.
Absolutely.
Like Deputy O'Dowd, I am astonished to hear that the people at the front line in delivering the fire service have not been consulted about the evolution of this document. What we have here is the second edition of the draft. We are told SIPTU has not had sight of this and that the framework is being developed without its involvement. I support Deputy O'Dowd's proposal that we should communicate the committee's concern to the Department. SIPTU should be consulted in regard to this issue and should be very much involved in the development of the process.
I would like to hear more about the meat of the disagreement with the proposals in the document. Lack of legislation has been highlighted in the submission. Are we talking about legislation solely in regard to major emergency management or are we talking about new legislation in respect of the fire services generally? The Farrell Grant Sparks report recommended that the fire services be restructured and proposed the establishment of a national fire authority. What is SIPTU's view on that? In respect of the nomination of the lead agency, what exactly is the point of concern? Is it a concern about the appropriateness of the lead agency that might be selected in particular cases and who is responsible for it? In respect of risk assessment, is there concern that persons or agencies outside the fire service or outside the normal public service might be brought in to do risk assessment?
Mr. Brady
I will work back from the last question on risk assessment. I understand it is proposed that regional steering groups will be set up and that these will feed in by way of agencies such as the Garda Síochána, the health services and the fire services. Our concern is that since we have not been seen as key stakeholders in the development of the document, we will not be seen as key stakeholders in the development of regional policy or as a driving force behind it. As people who are at the coalface, who understand the risks associated with situations as they occur and the appropriate procedures, our main concern is that we are not being allowed to become involved in that process but we will have to live with the consequence of decisions, whoever makes them. In a slightly different vein, but it is worth saying, a risk assessment is being conducted by an intergovernmental agency on the possibility of terrorist attacks and so on. It appears the Garda Síochána has been assigned a certain sum to prepare for such an eventuality, to train personnel and provide extra equipment. The same applies to our colleagues in the health services. In regard to the Defence Forces, the Minister has stated that he will issue every member with a chemical suit if that is what is required. We seem to be the poor relation. Our difficulty is that because firefighters and fire officers who work at the coalface are not represented, our concerns are not being addressed. What is taking place today gives us no encouragement to believe that risk assessment carried out by regional groups in our absence from the table will be any different.
In regard to the lead agency, there does not seem to be clarity. Let me take the example of a road traffic accident. We hear daily about the number of deaths on our roads and the campaign against drink driving. What we do not hear discussed is the intervention of the emergency services or how effective or otherwise we are in saving the lives of casualties. There is a well-documented principle of the golden hour — somebody who is involved in an incident has the best chance of surviving if he or she is in hospital and in the operating theatre within the first hour of the incident happening. That is not occurring. That is a very serious issue and it is down to lack of resources. Our major concern in this case is that the Garda Síochána has been nominated as the lead agency. I mean no disrespect to our colleagues in the Garda, but that is difficult to understand. The main purpose of attendance at a road traffic accident is casualty management and the safe removal of casualties to the hospital. If the experience and competency for that rests with agencies such as the fire and rescue services, that is from where the lead agency should come. Without having an opportunity to sit at the table and discuss that, we have great difficulty in understanding it. In the case of swift water rescue, again we have the capacity to deal with such incidents. I will touch on this issue again when I am talking about legislation. The capacity to intervene when somebody is drowning has been developed throughout the fire services. The timeframe in which that takes place is vital. However, we find that for some reason, again, the Garda Síochána is the nominated lead agency. We have difficulty in understanding that. An individual garda on the bank of a river will, in his or her bravery, decide to intervene. However, intervention needs to be more controlled and more organised, and we need to have the necessary resources and personnel to be able to intervene successfully with the possibility of rescue. I or Mr. Brian Murray can expand on that if the committee wishes.
The third issue we have identified is the area of hazardous substances and the management of incidents involving hazardous substances. In the document the responsibility for biological hazards has been assigned to the health services under one heading. While we recognise that hospitals and the areas around hospitals must be protected and defended in the event of any major incident occurring, there is difficulty in that area because there are now two or three agencies that must have the same net resources. If we are already struggling for resources there seems to be no logic behind that process. That is an example of our concerns regarding the lead agency.
In regard to the legislation there are two areas of concern. We are very conscious that the Fire Services Act 1981 is a document which is in need of updating. We are conscious that the term "fire services" no longer reflects the roles and functions we are expected to play in society. Most of our services today describe themselves as fire and rescue services because that is what they engage in, whether it involves river rescue, road traffic accidents or chemical incidents. We are equally aware that the narrow definition of the fire services within that legislation is hamstringing our possibilities in terms of developing. Equally, when the fire services seek necessary resources to enable them to fund their capacity they are hamstrung because of lack of legislation in that area.
I hope I have explained some of the issues.
I thank the delegation for its presentation. There is a need for new legislation. Many people do not know that in the Dublin area the fire services operate ambulances, telephones etc. and that, essentially, they are the people who are on the front line and know how to deal with the majority of the accidents that occur. That should be reflected in both their title and in the legislation.
From the document we have been given, it seems the designation of lead agencies came from the Department of Defence, which is news to me, although the deputation may be aware of it, but the Department of Defence does not figure as a lead agency in any of the planning. I can envisage problems particularly with road accidents involving hazardous materials. One could have a heated discussion as to who would be charge, depending on the sign designating the hazardous materials involved. I presume the Garda Síochána would take over in the case of a road traffic accident. There is room for confusion. I propose we write to the Minister asking him to ensure full consultation and to clarify whether we need new legislation, as I certainly believe we do. It appears that is part of what is being proposed to us today.
Mr. Brady
By way of clarification to ensure people are not misled, road traffic accidents, where hazardous materials are involved, specifically fall to the fire authority. There is a footnote at the bottom of the document which states that in the event of a road traffic accident involving hazardous materials the lead agency is the fire service.
I did not read the footnote.
Mr. Brady
I do not want to mislead the committee.
I join colleagues in welcoming the SIPTU delegation and thank it for its presentation. Certainly, it has shed more light on the issue. It is incredible, unacceptable and a fundamental flaw that the union was not consulted on the framework document. It reminds me of the case of the Dublin port tunnel where huge trucks will enter and leave the tunnel in the middle of the road which ordinarily would be the busy lanes. If anybody had taken the trouble to speak to a haulier or lorry driver for five minutes, the difficulty would have been spotted. Increasingly, there is a lack of consultation with those who count most. That is most unfortunate and needs to be corrected urgently.
Does the delegation agree there is an urgent need for a fire risk assessment for the whole of Dublin? How long is it since there has been a significant review and is that an issue? Should there be an emphasis on the depot sites, for example, in Dublin Port and Blanchardstown? We are referring to road traffic accidents but it is not just RTAs — clearly, the depot sites could be an issue.
Why did the State not respond to the EU civil response to recent human disasters? We are debating EU issues in the House today, yet one arm of the State is ignoring a request from the European Union. Does the delegation consider the Dublin fire service should be consulted in regard to significant developments? Adamstown and the north fringe, as well as the proposed works at Poolbeg, are huge developments. Given that the emergency services will have to deal with these developments, does SIPTU have a view on the matter? Planners, developers and politicians are all involved to some extent in looking at the issues involved, on which they have their own perspectives. Does the delegation have a view on the servicing of such developments in the event of an emergency?
I would like clarification on the lead agency issue. If, say, a road traffic accident occurrs and persons are trapped within a vehicle, while, say, 60,000 to 80,000 people are leaving Croke Park, will traffic management issues be given priority over the rescue of the persons trapped, notwithstanding the golden hour provisions?
I agree with the comments of all previous speakers who agreed with Deputy O'Dowd that we should communicate urgently with the Minister in this regard. That is a good idea and I support it. I hope the joint committee will support it also.
Mr. Brady
I will answer the last question first. Where there is a major road traffic accident, all three agencies are likely to be in attendance. All three have worked and should continue to work effectively with and for one another. The focus would be on saving the life of the casualty. While road traffic management is a key factor, we see its co-ordination as a natural process. Our difficulty is that in any given road traffic accident we will either save or lose a life. What I am concerned about is that we are not getting it right in our interventions. For example, if one is living in a rural area, it is likely there will be one or, perhaps, two services in attendance but not three, the reason being a lack of resources. Let me refer briefly to a subject that does not form part of this process but interfaces with it. The charging for services directly affects our participation in these processes. If people are adding the pounds, shillings and pence before they ring the bell or pull the switch, that directly affects our intervention. There is a need for a sea change in this regard.
Mr. Tony McDonnell
On the question of whether Dublin fire brigade should be consulted with regard to significant developments, approximately two years ago we were made aware of developments in what is referred to as the north fringe area in and around Darndale. We requested that Dublin fire brigade be represented on the north fringe committee but this was not allowed. We were asked why it should be represented on the committee. There are many reasons. When one thinks of a new development, one includes road ramps without any thought for the emergency services. Road ramps diminish our response times. Another reason members of the Dublin fire brigade should be represented on development committees is the level of demand placed by new developments, from schools, cinemas and so on, on the resources of the fire and ambulance brigade in the Dublin area. We have sought such representation. We have also asked Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and South Dublin County Council that members of the Dublin fire brigade be represented on the councils. If we are making the case that they should be represented on the intergovernmental committee given their experience and the knowledge, equally, they should be able to indicate the resources needed.
When did SIPTU ask?
Mr. McDonnell
Approximately 18 months ago we made the initial request that Dublin fire brigade be represented in the north fringe. We subsequently sought permission to participate in regard to developments in Dún Laoghaire — in Rathmichael for argument's sake. Another major development will be coming on stream in Adamstown. To my knowledge, no members of senior management are represented to discuss the further resources, stations and so on that will be required. As I said, road ramps reduce our response times.
The Deputy also asked about EU civil protection. It is my understanding that Ireland, through the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, forwarded questionnaires to the relevant brigades and local authorities, asking who would be willing to participate in an Irish response team responding to an EU incident. Dublin fire brigade signed up stating it would be willing to participate. Supposedly approximately 42 people were registered to attend. To the best of my knowledge, the European Union asked Ireland to respond to the tsunami, the earthquakes in Iran, flooding around the Danube, etc. and that on each occasion Ireland had to state it could not participate. We have never been consulted on the issue. We have never been able to say as a union what we would like to do; how we would interact, or what our colleagues in the United Kingdom or the United States do.
In regard to the Seveso sites, the Deputy asked——
Why can SIPTU members not serve? Is it due to a lack of training or equipment or both?
Mr. McDonnell
Both. There has been no consultation. We have never been asked for an input. As we are not at the coalface, we are unable to make a case in terms of the facilities and resources that may be required to facilitate what is envisaged. One is required to interact with other agencies in, for example, matters such as ensuring that a helicopter is on standby to collect the team, the equipment used, etc. Regrettably, Ireland has on several occasions declined the EU's request in this regard.
Mr. Brian Murray
On that point, Ireland, through the fire service, may not wish to participate at a particular incident on the continent of Europe. However, should an incident occur here that requires the State to request the activation of the civil protection mechanism, we will then be expecting international teams from Europe and elsewhere to provide assistance. As a result of our non-participation in the process, we will not comprehend the methodologies operated by the international teams and will not have the required command and control systems in place.
The Department dealing with overseas development indicated that it will allocate funds to the European civil protection mechanism or to international aid. While such aid will be utilised, I have no doubt that our international colleagues will tell us that it will not be possible to have an aircraft sitting at the end of a runway and ready to fly to whatever destination in Europe at which it may be required. However, the funding may well be spent in that way. Unless our fire services gain international experience in dealing with disasters, they will not have the skills required to deal with disasters here. It is unfortunate that it is only by observing how such disasters are tackled that we can obtain experience in terms of identifying problems with the mechanisms we have in place to deal with such situations. However, that is the nature of the business. It is critical that we gain such experience.
The Irish fire service would only be a spectator.
Mr. Murray
Yes, a spectator from a distance. The Deputy asked about a risk assessment for Dublin. A risk assessment is required for every city, county and town in Ireland, not just Dublin. One of the growing number of phenomena with which the fire service is obliged to deal is the regular occurrence of rural and urban flooding. When we send fire fighters to deal with such situations, we expect that they are skilled to deal with the hazardous environment into which they are being deployed and that they are equipped with the appropriate personal protective equipment, PPE.
The document refers to river, canal, lake rescue and so on. An issue of enormous concern to us is that of flooding in large urban areas. We are required, as part of a risk assessment, to ensure there is business continuity when these disasters occur.
I have a brief supplementary. Reference was made to the golden hour. I am aware that members of the fire service are obliged to deal with road traffic accidents. Many European countries provide helicopter rescue for road traffic accidents. Do the members of the delegation have an opinion as to whether such a service should be introduced here? The number of isolated road traffic accidents here has increased and such a service would ensure that people could be brought to hospital much more quickly, which might lead to lives being saved.
Mr. McDonnell
A review of the ambulance service in Dublin city and county is being conducted. Included in our submission to the review is a recommendation that a helicopter rescue service be established in Dublin. The issue was also dealt with in a Government report on the helicopter emergency medical service, HEMS. Dublin Fire Brigade has signalled its willingness to participate in providing the paramedics required and so on. I agree with the Deputy that a helicopter rescue service should be an integral part of our emergency service.
I am struck by the fact that, given our range of emergency services, we have not yet included such a service in our emergency plans.
Mr. Brady
A recently commissioned report on sudden death syndrome recommended that all emergency service vehicles carry defibrillators and the personnel required to operate them. That has not yet been achieved within the fire service across the country. Requests to the Department for such resources have been refused. We are light years away from the provision of a helicopter rescue service at accidents. If, however, we can ensure that our personnel throughout the country are trained to first responder level, we have the potential to make a difference.
Mr. McDonnell
Mr. Brady referred to the rural aspect of this matter. It is mandatory that the fire and ambulance services be deployed to road traffic accidents that occur within the confines of Dublin. However, that is not happening in the rest of the country. We need to ensure that fire service personnel throughout the remainder of the country are trained to first responder level and are deployed to accidents at the same time as their counterparts in the ambulance service.
Mr. Brady also made the point that it is vital that the emergency services provide intervention at road traffic accidents during the so-called golden hour if lives are to be saved.
Mr. Brady mentioned that many people are refusing to call in the fire service as a result of charges. The local authority in County Louth advises all homeowners to update their household policies to include fire service charges. This can, in most cases, be done for little or no extra cost. What is the position in the Dublin area?
Mr. Brady
Dublin Fire Brigade does not operate charges for services provided at domestic dwellings, which is a good policy. However, a difficulty arises in terms of people's perception in that regard. I will provide the Deputy with an example. I had cause to call to a house in south County Dublin at a stage when such charges were being implemented. I arrived at the house at approximately midnight and met the elderly couple who lived there. They had a chimney fire earlier that day and had dealt with it by placing wet sack on it and so on. The only question I was asked was how much the service would cost. Upon investigation of the situation we discovered that the fire was trapped between the ceiling of the downstairs room and their bedroom. It was only after they had gone to bed that they smelled the smoke.
Farrell Grant Sparks recognises the difficulties that can arise and has recommended that direct charges should not be implemented in light of the problems encountered in introducing them and the fact that administration of same in some counties costs more than the amount realised. Farrell Grant Sparks also recommends the introduction of a direct levy by insurance companies. Insurance helps to alleviate the problems of those involved in car and other accidents. However, many people throughout the country do not have insurance policies.
I do not wish to labour the point but this issue is also linked to industry. The fire authority insists that premises such as hotels and so on install fire alarms and detectors. While they are obliged to do so, it can lead to their operating a second-knock system, namely, because of charges, they respond and call the fire service only when an alarm is activated a second time. This affects the development of the fire — this is happening in nursing homes and so on — and firefighters who are then required to attend a developed fire rather than a small one. The introduction of such charges is a bad idea. Farrell Grant Sparks recommended that charges should not be introduced but that recommendation was not taken up.
If the delegation does not have the information I am seeking, perhaps it could forward it to the joint committee at a later date. How does Ireland compare with other countries in respect of the ratio of people to fire officers, fire stations, equipment and so on? I was reading recently that the much maligned Deputy Prime Minister of the neighbouring state had done great things in upgrading fire and emergency services and wonder if we could follow his example.
Mr. Brady
As part of the Farrell Grant Sparks review group, we researched our position in the European Union and examined our contribution per capita and so on. I do not have the details but we were at the bottom end of the league in terms of expenditure on the fire service per capita. We can provide the joint committee with the detail.
Mr. Murray
In response to the Deputy's first question on the ratio of people to each fire fighter in other countries, Scotland has approximately 1.4 fire fighters per 1,000 population, while Northern Ireland has 1.2. In Ireland, we have approximately 1.9 fire fighters per 1,000 population.
One of the problems that emerged in the study of the fire brigade service undertaken by Farrell Grant Sparks was the lack of statistics. However, when one examines world statistics, which draw comparisons on spending, the study shows we spend approximately 40% less on fire protection than our EU neighbours. It further states we are in the upper spectrum of those spending the least amount of money and have one of the highest levels of fire fatalities per head of population in Europe. When our record is benchmarked against that of our nearest neighbours, we do not stand up very well.
Mr. Brady
In the United Kingdom, the authorities have created a new concept since 11 September 2001 called "New Dimension", which recognises the possibility of a terrorist threat and all that flows from it, as well as environmental tragedies such as flooding and so on. This has been funded to the hilt. They have regional capacity stitched into local authority capacity. Let me give an example. It would not make sense to fund every local authority to the maximum for chemical suits and decontamination procedures, but it would make sense to have regional capacity to be able to intervene and provide support. In Ireland we do not have this resource or a policy committee to look at the issue. We are not at the table to exert influence or reflect our concerns.
Mr. Noel Heany
I am from outside the Dublin area. Some local authorities operate a dual system. I work in the fire brigade service in Cork city which provides fire cover for the county. In other counties they are depending on their neighbours to provide cover. When we are called out to deal with a house fire in Cork city, we send two pumps and two crews. In Dublin the same number would be sent but other local authorities would send the minimum number of appliances and if more were needed, they would seek back-up. However, the response time is limited. One needs to protect fire crews. The level of fire cover varies from local authority to local authority. If one lives 100 yards beyond the city boundaries, one will get a diminished response from the fire service.
I welcome the delegation. I apologise for my absence. I was trying to attend another meeting at the same time, which is not appropriate.
I compliment the members of the fire brigade on the very difficult job they are doing. I wish to clarify a number of issues. I assume — I do not know much about this — the members of the fire service, as distinct from SIPTU which represents staff, were consulted. Is that the point being made? If that is the case, will somebody point to the deficit in information and expertise that followed from not engaging SIPTU in the consultative process?
My second concern is that doubt has been cast on Europe's response to a request for support and assistance from Ireland in the event of a natural disaster. It is important to have this point clarified because I may have misinterpreted the delegates' response. If we do not respond to the needs of others in Europe, are we putting ourselves in a position where if we request assistance, it will not be forthcoming? I presume we do not have the necessary expertise to respond to natural disasters such as earthquakes and flood relief requests. Are we better off concentrating on getting the vital resources required to deal with emergencies that occur in Ireland rather than on being resourced, equipped and kitted out to go abroad to provide support? Perhaps I am being selfish in suggesting we concentrate on responding to emergencies that occur here rather than trying to equip ourselves to respond to emergencies abroad. It was suggested that in some rural areas all three essential services did not respond, which I find worrying.
I remind members that we are to hear a presentation from the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists. We must wrap up this discussion shortly.
Mr. Halpenny
Given the level of partnership, an occasional request — my office would only request such a meeting with the Minister or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on an extreme occasion — would be met with a much more forthright response. Let me pose the alternative. As a national committee, we decided to organise our own conference on major disaster planning and the related issue of civil protection. We approached the Office of the State Pathologist, the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, the Dublin Fire Brigade, Dublin City Council and Cork Fire Brigade. From our own resources we brought in experts from the United Kingdom who were running courses in swift water rescue, as well as staff from the fire brigade union and London fire brigade. We are not as big as the Department but saw the advantage in casting the net wide. For the amount of money we spent, we received an enormous amount of operational feedback. That brings me to my final point. If one is to stack up the performance of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and how widely it casts its net, there was at least parity in the way we approached the issue with our somewhat more modest resources. The fundamental point is that the people the Department consulted do not necessarily have the same operational or, in some cases, any operational experience. All the people we represent — we represent more than 90% of the fire service — whether full-time staff or those on retainers, have operational experience. I am not suggesting that every member of the fire service should be consulted but the filtering of information and experience through the representative structure would at least give the Department the edge in terms of an operational dimension to the document, the concept of which we welcome.
I am playing devil's advocate, but could the other stakeholders who were consulted make a similar case that their representative trade union was not consulted? For example, were the representative associations for the Garda Síochána and other stakeholders consulted?
Mr Halpenny
I do not know. The point is not that it was SIPTU, but that SIPTU was the representative body for people with the operational experience.
I accept that, however it follows that each of the other front line services and stakeholders would have had representation also. Were they consulted or was it the same as your situation?
Mr Murray
The review of the fire service by the independent consultants Farrell Grant Sparks states that people with operational and technical experience should be involved in drawing up plans for major emergency management.
I will answer Deputy Morgan on the EU. I did not mean to mislead the Deputy. If this country were to request a response from other European nations we should be in a position to operate systems similar to those used by their fire services. We went to London two years prior to the bombings of last July and spoke to fire officers in London who were drawing up the plans for response. They were of the opinion that it was a question of when rather than if a terrorist attack was to take place, regardless of whether it was to be through a dirty bomb, conventional explosives or a biological or nuclear incident. We had a good idea of the response plan they were assembling so we had some experience of what was being done internationally on major emergency management.
Mr. Brady
On the issue of consultation, we feel we are unique. Our colleagues in the Garda and other agencies who engage in consultation are people who have had frontline experience. We recognise that there is a system of hierarchy in the fire service and we are attempting to address this through the national review. This will not be addressed in the short term so we must have a forum at which our voice is heard, and at the moment SIPTU provides that forum. If representatives of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government are asked why they have not consulted us they will respond that if they were to do so they would have to talk to all the various unions. However, we are unique due to our circumstances. Despite this we are stakeholders in this issue and have a key role to play: whether it is 3 o'clock in the morning or 3 o'clock in the afternoon it will be our people who are at the coalface doing the best we can in the circumstances.
The local authorities that have indicated their willingness to engage in this process have had their requests for the necessary resources refused by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Department requests a response yet refuses to help. This is incredible for a country that has signed up to the concept of civil protection. The stated policies and the actual reality are not the same.
There is no clear policy throughout the country on road traffic accidents. Any one or two of three agencies may be called to the scene. If an agency arrives and finds someone trapped it may have to call out another agency. Think of the "golden hour" and how long it takes to get from A to B for each successive agency. If it takes each 20 minutes, how long is left to take the casualty from the vehicle to the operating table? This is what we need to urgently address.
I thank the delegation for its presentation. I think we all agree that the fire service is a highly respected institution in this State. We will submit the delegation's presentation to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, and request that it be formally consulted on this plan.
Mr. Halpenny
We are happy to supply information and follow-up on the comparative statistics that Deputy Gilmore requested. We will be happy to return if required.