This year has been my first time at FIREX International, and the scale of the show has been overwhelming.
Trying to find a trend in an industry that is typically (and appropriately) cautious and slow to introduce products is a real challenge. The long approval cycles for fire safety products seem to ensure that the market grows steadily but never rapidly.
The big topic for the FIA and many of the manufacturers attending FIREX International seems to be the creeping remit of the fire services. Squeezed budgets have left UK fire services scratching their heads to try and find enough money to maintain service quality. Those making the cuts, of course, assure us that they won’t damage the effectiveness of firefighters in the communities they serve, and that response times will be maintained — while the average target seems to creep on from the often-quoted six minutes.
On Wednesday, I spoke to Graham Ellicott, CEO of the Fire Industry Association, about the unfair advantage that UK fire services trading arms are being given at the expense of the taxpayer. He is extremely concerned that taxpayer’s money is being used to set up commercial trading arms for fire services, which are then denting the businesses of smaller fire safety organisations. FIA members are among the many companies that could be said to be losing business because of this.
The private sector is having to pick up the slack in many public services from health to prisons, but the funding cuts to fire services are just leading them to set up their own commercial arms to restrict job losses. The Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority announced plans to establish such a business in January to “help offset the effect of future budget cuts.”
That seems to make sense, right? It would take the burden away from the taxpayer completely. The fire authorities would use those skills and knowledge they are uniquely placed to have more wisely in order to develop safer communities with improved fire safety standards. The benefits for the economy could be significant. If those fire services can do a really good job, then we might be able to fund even more significant budget cuts in the future. If there are fewer fires, there’s less need for firefighting, right?
But is it wise, and is it fair? Ellicott made the point that a visitor to a show like FIREX sees a person in a fire service uniform on a stand and instantly attaches an increased amount of credibility to that business. The fire service-backed business will have that huge competitive advantage, and this could hurt the whole fire industry.
We must be careful when sanctioning fire service commercial arms. The UK is a world leader in fire safety, and our fire safety industry is quite possibly the strongest in the world. This all goes back to the Great Fire of London, of course, after which London basically invented the idea of a fire break. For centuries since, the UK has been at the forefront of the industry. The UK fire protection industry was estimated to be worth just less than GB pound 3 billion as of 2009.
Fire safety products are slow to develop, but so too is the move by fire services into providing commercial services. Is it right that they try to get their slice of the GB pound 3 billion on offer?
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.
Creates far too many concerns about conflict of interest. You can’t criticise a business for poor training, risk assessment etc. if you provided it. A while back there was a proposal by some services to charge for advertising on fire engines. I wonder whether this has happened either? Surely can’t be the right way to go. Perhaps if HSE’s Fee for Intervention proves a succes the fire service will start charging for ‘material breaches’ of legislation. To be honest, whilst not a fan of the HSE scheme it would fit better with the fire service because at least there are… Read more »
Interesting you should say about advertising on the engines. For an April fool we almost ran an article saying exactly that, that fire companies were seeking new revenue streams by using their engines as billboards. We didn’t run it in the end, but I didn’t realise this was something that was actually under consideration. Amazing.
One thing I know for sure is that gaining a market share in an industry like fire services products is a hard one. In most places I have been, fire products seem to be from one brand or two.
There’s certainly more than one or two but compared to other industries, yes, it’s a market made up of less vendors. Mainly due to the difficulty and cost of developing products; imagine setting up a company an having to wait several years for approvals before being able to sell any products. Then you start to see why.
Rob, I totally agree with your point. it is hard to invest in manufacturing when approval for sales have not been given. For the growth of economy and avoding monopoly I think those in charge of approving such should awake and arise to the dawn of new products.
It’s a really tricky balance to walk. You have to make sure the products are safe before releasing them, but equally the companies developing them require an element of expediancy to stay in business. The picture is similar in the pharmaceuticals market from what I understand, where it can costs millions to develop new drugs over the course of many years.
I would agree that this is a downer. It’s a hindrance to the industry and economy as a whole, and sometimes you’d really have to wonder what’s going through their mind.