Established 140 years ago Clerkenwell Station is one of 10 stations being closed to save GB pound 45 million over two years.
Emotional firemen emerged from the East-London station on Wednesday to applause from supporters whose protests ultimately proved in vain.
The London brigade is also cutting 552 firefighter jobs and decommissioning 14 fire engines.
If the loss to cultural heritage is saddening — though the talk is of granting the buildings listing status as they convert into flats or restaurants — then the consequences for response times are unthinkable, according to London regional secretary of the Fire Brigades Union Paul Embery.
“Boris Johnson will have blood on his hands,” said Embery. “It will be only a matter of time before someone dies because a fire engine did not get to them in time.
“You cannot close 10 fire stations and slash nearly 600 firefighter jobs without compromising public safety. These stations have protected generations of Londoners, and they are as necessary now as they ever were.”
Proponents of the closures point to a 50% reduction in fires across the capital, while national callouts have dropped to an all-time low.
But while incidents are less frequent, for which the fire-prevention industry can take some credit, the jury’s out on whether the capital’s average response time — 6 minutes 38 seconds for domestic fires in 2011-2012 — will be affected.
Writing in the Guardian, Suzanne Moore argues that the cuts are symptomatic of a widespread underestimation of the difficulty of a firefighter’s job.
Improvements in fire detection, notification of first responders, and situational awareness technologies also perhaps emboldened fire chiefs in making cutbacks. The fact remains, however, that many businesses, and most residential properties, have fairly basic fire-prevention technology in place.
As resource constraints tighten, reducing the number of false alarms is increasingly seen as an achievable way of slashing costs without compromising safety.
In 2012 the Fire Brigade dealt with 25,550 false alarms at a cost of GB pound 37 million — GB pound 8 million shy of the savings targeting by the station closures. Improved fire-prevention training along with simpler installation and maintenance can all help in this regard.
The London Fire Service hopes that unnecessary callouts to commercial premises will fall after introducing a fine to businesses responsible for 10 callouts or more over a 12-month period.
What are your views on the fire station closures? Is merging stations the most cost-effective way of making the service leaner without compromising safety in a time of austerity and falling incident numbers? Or is it a folly that will jeopardise the Fire Service’s six-minute callout target — and therefore lives?
Download the Fire Safety in 2023 eBook, keeping you up to date with the biggest news and prosecution stories from around the industry. Chapters include important updates such as the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and an overview of the new British Standard for the digital management of fire safety information.
Plus, we explore the growing risks of lithium-ion battery fires and hear from experts in disability evacuation and social housing.
It is interesting to note that the closure of the ten fire stations in London was almost exactly a year to the day since the repeal of Section 20 of the London Building Act. Amongst other things, Section 20 used to require sprinklers in many large buildings in the capital. Since its repeal, both the sprinkler industry and the insurance industry have reported a number of occupiers of old Section 20 buildings making enquiries about isolating and removing their sprinkler systems. The London boroughs advise that occupiers should consult the fire authority before removing sprinklers, but Section 20 sprinklers were… Read more »
Im in two minds about this:
The Knight report clearly showed that there are savings to be made in that there was excess resource sat costing the country money, but not being used.
The flip side is that when it IS needed, there is no telling just how badly or where it will be needed – IE if there were ever to be a repeat of the 7/7 attacks, every single man and tender available would be called to bear…
No doubt there is some clause that will allow “good old” Boris and the government to be excused liability and being held to account in the eyes of the law and immune to any legal actions raised if the service cuts can be shown to be the the cause of loss of life and property. Logic, of which bean counters seem bereft would indicate that Emergency Services need to be running with excess capacity at all times, it may seem that they are over staffed when demand is low, but at times of crisis, which seem to be… Read more »
Being an ex Fire Officer, I find even more cuts to the Fire Service a sad tragedy. Making the cuts in central London is very worrying, especially when considering the fire spread potential. No one can dispute the huge drop in the number of fires the FB in UK now attend, compared to years ago. What all the recent cuts do not appear to consider too well is the implications should anyone be unfortunate enough to suffer a fire. Large fire losses are increasing and as David suggests, if occupiers decomission sprinklers these losses will increase. I recently did some… Read more »
Cost of everything and the value of nothing springs to mind! My late father in Law was a Fireman during WWII. He stood with other fires service heros, for HOURS firehose in his grip as he and colleagues strove to put out docks warehouse fires. They attended these incidents for up to THREE DAYS, with little relief, and the low water levels from their river supply almost defeated them. ALL the resources of the then fire brigades were called out. THERE WERE NO “SPARE” engines, and even stirrup pumps were handed to ARP wardens for house fires! Father-in Law told… Read more »
Some fascinating comments and it’s interesting to find out – especially given I’ve only just started as content manager on IFSEC Global – which stories spark the biggest debate.
Interesting point about the need for spare capacity and the simultaneous widespread decommissioning of sprinklers certainly betrays a lack of joined-up thinking across government.
I’m still a rookie in understanding the industry so I’m in no position to pontificate about this subject. One hopes that future efficiencies can be made through reducing false alarms etc rather than slashing station or fire engine numbers.
Interesting to read the comment on “false alarms” as a target for “savings”. Fire Authorities in my region have implemented a procedure which, when an expensive alarm system triggers at the Fire Control HQ, (sometimes at weekend), there is now an instruction,(Or was just before I left Fire Service Liaison), which states clearly that appliances unless they receive “at least one” manual tel. backup call, should attend at “Speeds respecting the speed limit in force, and also restrict emergency siren and beacons so as to “not unduly alarm other road users”…(My italics). The fact that many industrial premises have no… Read more »
It is ironic that instead of rewarding the fire department for improvements in fire safety conditions it is being punished. Closing stations is like reversing what has been achieved by their presence and sincere efforts spread over decades. Apart from response time, their mere absence will reflect badly on the people residing in these areas.
@ SFX Supervisor, you are right in saying that emergency services seem over staffed in peaceful times but it doesn’t mean that they are not needed or should be axed. One would wonder what is the use of bomb disposal squads when they are called for duty only occasionally. It is always worth spending for crisis situations that nobody can predict.