Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services: reform of fire and rescue authorities' governance and finance arrangements, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services—Alun Davies. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, we are all rightly proud of our fire and rescue services. They respond swiftly, effectively and selflessly to serious threats to our safety. More than that, their prevention work has helped reduce the number of fires and fire casualties by more than half since responsibility was devolved to Wales in 2005. That is a huge success, but it is also a challenge. As the number of fires falls, the role of the service will become broader. Firefighters have the skills, training, capabilities and values to deal with a wide range of other incidents, such as floods, medical emergencies and terrorist attacks. Taking on this broader role is not only beneficial, I believe it is essential to the service’s future. 

We already have several fire stations in Wales that typically deal with less than one emergency call-out to a fire every month, and many that see only a few dozen a year. We understand that this is not sustainable and it makes recruiting, motivating and retaining firefighters very difficult indeed. But nor should such stations be closed, as that would leave large parts of the country with no fire service at all. 

So, the future depends on realising the potential to do more in collaboration with other agencies. To achieve that and secure a future that is viable, the service needs to be governed and funded in a modern, accountable and sustainable way. At present it is not.

There are other growing challenges too. People are living longer and staying independently in their homes, which is exactly what we want to see. However, older people are at greater risk of fires in their homes. At the same time, the lessons of the Grenfell Tower tragedy still have to be fully learned and applied. Climate change will increase the risks of flooding and wildfires, and public finances are extremely constrained—a situation that is only likely to worsen in the aftermath of Brexit. Again, this calls for the highest standards of leadership and transparency, ensuring the service has the resources it needs, but also placing that in a wider context of other public services.

The current governance and funding arrangements are not fit for this new purpose. They mean the service is run by what are, in effect, large committees at arm’s length from all other local services and without any kind of direct democratic mandate. There isn’t any real public debate or accountability about what the service does or ought to do, and insufficient engagement tools to respond to changing local needs. Yet such debate and such accountability have never been more important.

Fire and rescue authorities’ funding arrangements have similar flaws. They involve the authorities levying contributions from local authorities, at a level that the fire and rescue authority alone determines. There is no external control or approval at all at either the local or the national level. At a time of continuing, severe austerity across all public services, that is difficult to justify. There needs to be a sustainable source of funding for the growing range of non-fire responsibilities that I have already described this afternoon. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, the current arrangements date from the mid-1990s. Whilst they may well have been adequate at that time, the service and the demands placed upon it have changed significantly since. No-one should see this as any kind of criticism of the current fire and rescue authority members, managers or staff. We know that they have done their best within the flawed system, but that system itself now needs to change.

The White Paper I am publishing today sets out our preferred approach to reform. This is grounded firmly in the need to enhance local control of the service, and to generate effective leadership and real accountability at that local level. That will mean fire and rescue authority membership becoming more streamlined and more transparent, with greater capacity and capability to provide strategic and political leadership and to build connections with other services and agencies. I also want to see effective challenge at that level from non-executive members.

Fire and rescue authorities' budgets also need proper scrutiny and approval. That role should rest with local authorities, which provide the great majority of fire and rescue authority funds. We appreciate emergency services can neither manage nor predict demand, so that must be reflected in their resourcing. If there were any threat to that or the service standards we enjoy, the Welsh Government would not hesitate to step in.   

Most of these changes can happen relatively soon, without the need for primary legislation. In the longer term, I am keen to explore a more radical reform that would fully support the changing role of the service and would enable proper professional leadership of it, with appointed members remaining in an oversight role. I also want to explore options for sustainable and transparent funding for the range of responsibilities we expect the service to discharge.

We must focus on the outcomes of reform than merely on the means. I would, therefore, also be happy to consider other options for reform through the consultation process that would clearly meet the criteria that the White Paper demands. 

However, let me be very clear that under no circumstances am I prepared to transfer control of the service to police and crime commissioners, as is happening in England. I do not either intend to alter the current pattern of three fire and rescue authorities or amend their existing boundaries. As we have seen across the border, those approaches create more problems than they would resolve. 

I also want to reassure our firefighters that reform is concerned solely with how the fire and rescue authorities operate at the corporate level, and not with front-line delivery. I want to provide the service with clearer, more accountable leadership and fairer, more sustainable funding. There is nothing here that will affect the numbers of firefighters, the training regimes, appliances, fire stations or other operational matters. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, change is all too often a response to failure and creates even more burdens on an organisation in difficulty. That is not the case here. I want to build on the successes that we have seen and to sustain the successes that the service has enjoyed to ensure that we do have in the future a service on which we can all continue to rely. 

Well, as you say, we are rightly proud of our fire and rescue services. You state in your opening paragraph that they've worked to help reduce the number of fires and fire casualties. In fact, since 2001-02, a little bit further back than you look, they've reduced by 69 per cent. However, how do you respond to concern that the number of fires attended by Welsh fire and rescue authorities in 2017-18 actually increased by 3 per cent, reversing that trend, with the number of secondary fires rising by 13 per cent, and grassland, woodland and crop fires by 22 per cent, and 15 casualties from fires in Wales, which is actually 50 per cent higher than when 10 fire casualties in Wales were used as an argument in favour of what became the fire sprinkler legislation?

You refer to older people being at greater risk of fire in their homes and the lessons of the Grenfell tragedy. What consideration are you giving or have you given to the Building Research Establishment report commissioned by the Deputy Prime Minister in the UK in 2002 and the follow-up report by the Welsh Government itself at the tail end of the fire sprinkler legislation, which recommended fire sprinklers in high-rise towers? It was less enthusiastic about new-build residential properties. But it appeared that no response to that was taken until after the Grenfell tragedy.

In a letter to me on 20 June, you said that you don't agree that older people are at particular risk of electrical fires, whether in terms of the source of fire or the cause. I believe you might have since met Electrical Safety First. I think you had a meeting scheduled with them for July. They produced figures showing that, of 1,485 reported domestic fires last year—I presume that's UK—71 per cent of those were electrical fires and 63 per cent in the kitchen. And, in that context, what is the Welsh Government doing to raise awareness of fires caused by electricity in Wales?

My final questions relate to your proposed changes to governance and funding arrangements, which you say are simply not up to the job. You then ironically attribute the failings to

'large committees of backbench councillors, at arm’s length from all other local services and without any kind of direct democratic mandate.'

That's a model that, as I recall, you defended when the UK Government was proposing police and crime commissioners, using almost identical words at that time. You say that will mean fire and rescue authority membership becoming more streamlined and transparent, and budgets needing proper scrutiny and approval. Well, thankfully, the fire and rescue authorities are transparent with their meeting documentation, which is surely a valid point when considering their current governance and finance arrangements. The report from the chief fire officer in north Wales to their fire authority on 17 September referred to key issues set out in a letter to fire and rescue authority chairs in February by you for the meeting the three chairs had with you at the end of April, to your then engagement of Professor Catherine Farrell of the University of South Wales and Professor Rachel Ashworth at Cardiff University, to speak with representatives of the fire rescue authorities and the WLGA, and that their report was submitted to you. And the report from the deputy chief officer of South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority in September to his or her authority attached a summary feedback drawn from the meetings held with the fire and rescue authority chairs, chiefs and additional personnel and the WLGA. How, therefore, do you respond to the findings in that report that chiefs and chairs are not resistant to change, and provided many examples of how they embraced it, but they raised a series of concerns regarding the suggestion that fire and rescue governance in Wales might be reformed?

How do you respond to the statement that several queried the lack of clear evidence and rationale for reform, feeling that perceived problems with the current system had not been clearly identified, making it difficult for them to estimate the added value that might be gained through any change, to the statement in which some of them raised concern about changing a system that operates well and, quote, 'breaking a system which is not broken', giving the example that it was identified that accountability for fire was highly sufficient given the scale and budget for the service, relative to systems of accountability for other public services operating at a much larger scale, and to the statement that interviews emphasised the importance of the electoral link via local authorities and provided examples of how this was currently operationalised to deliver accountability, transparency, consultation and information? And, finally, how do you respond—I won't read them all because there are a lot of them—to the summary of suggestions for improvement in that report, which I'm sure you have engraved on your bedroom wall, but which included the need for consistency around member role specifications, the clarity around the scrutiny and challenge role, an indication of the level of member development and support, and the need for members with expertise from outside the service, from areas such as health and social care, to be co-opted onto the fire and rescue authority, or a new national issues committee scrutiny sub-committee? Thank you. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, I had a terrible fear halfway through that contribution that the Conservative Member was going to read out the notes of every meeting that I've had over the last year, and read out from the notes of every meeting the contribution of every member in that meeting. [Laughter.] It could have been a very, very long session. 

Let me say this: we have, as the Member has indicated, shall I say, had a very long conversation with both the current chairs and the chief officers as we've moved through this process. And I have, over the last year or so, sought to develop a debate, with the chairs particularly, over the need for reform and the shape that that reform will take. I introduced the academic element to that on the basis of an attempt to shape and to allow the development of their own thoughts on some of these issues. And let me say this: this is a White Paper, and it is a White Paper that seeks views on particular proposals, but it is not a White Paper that rules out alternatives. In fact, were the Member to take the time to read the White Paper in any detail, then he would see that, in the White Paper itself, we do take the time to say that if there are other proposals, other suggestions, other recommendations for reform, then we're very happy to take that forward and to consider those additional proposals. At no time in this process have I ruled in or ruled out any alternative measures or any alternative suggestions, with the exception of a national force, a national brigade, and also a transfer of responsibility to the police and crime commissioners. Those are the two options I've ruled out, but I've not ruled out other options. If the Conservative spokesperson does have any suggestions he wishes us to consider, then I'm more than happy to give due consideration to those issues. 

But in his contribution, he does, in many ways, make the case for reform. It might break his heart to learn this, but he does make the case for reform, because he outlines the changing nature of the threat from fire. He describes secondary fires, grassland and moorland fires, and he may wish to appreciate the expertise and specialisms that we now have in the fire services in Wales. He may be aware that the south Wales fire service spent a great deal of time working with others on Saddleworth moor, for example, dealing with the fires that took place in England, across the border, over the summer months. And that expertise—that knowledge, that specialism—is something that we want to enhance and invest in for the future. The abilities that the fire and rescue authorities and services now have is far beyond that which we would have potentially envisaged in the 1990s, when the current structures were put in place. And it is right and proper, therefore, that we meet an evolving and changing need with a debate and a discussion about how our structures are fit for purpose to meet that changing and evolving landscape.

So, I hope that he will perhaps lift his head a little, and give due consideration to these matters. And if he wishes to join the debate about the future, then I'm more than happy to have that conversation with him. The challenges that we will face in the future are great. We know, and we've debated already, the changes to a pattern of fire responses required. The Member asked a number of questions on Grenfell Tower and our response to that. I will say to him that our response has been led by the Minister in these matters, and she has, as he will be aware, made a number of statements to this Assembly on the evolving response of the Welsh Government to the absolute tragedy of Grenfell Tower. And we will be continuing, and she will be continuing, to lead that response.

But let me say this: as we move forward to respond—and, I believe, put in place a new structure to respond to Grenfell—it is right and proper that the fire and rescue authorities play a full and leading role in responding to that. That is why we need fire and rescue authorities that are fit for purpose, with the funding and the governance in place to enable them to do so.

Dai Lloyd.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Before I start, actually, it's entirely right that you are in the chair for this statement, DPO, being as you are the inspiration behind the fire sprinklers legislation, and it is right that we acknowledge that once again.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary also for his statement and welcome the production of this White Paper? It is right that we pay tribute to firefighters—we are rightly proud of them and all their rescue services. They rightly, as is always said, put their bodies on the line. And as is mentioned, there are other growing challenges too—people are living longer, as the Cabinet Secretary mentioned. And, yes, certainly in the community and primary care, we are keeping people at home now who we didn't use to keep at home. Routinely, we have very frail 80 and 90-year-old people living alone, and that is a particular challenge, and it's a challenge that, from time to time, I'm in conversation with fire colleagues as to how to address those challenges. So, certainly, the field is changing, with more emphasis on prevention work, as the number of fires, as we've heard, reduce. In fact, that's become obvious when you look at the Welsh cartoon involving that scion of the firefighting community, Sam Tân—firefighter Sam. Obviously, I'm watching these videos now with my grandson and they are entirely different videos to the ones I was watching a generation ago with my children, involving that accident-prone community of Pontypandy—far more emphasis on prevention these days, and the expanded role of the fire services generally, which is to be welcomed, naturally.

Now, in 1999, only one of the 999 services was devolved to this Assembly. By 2005, the second 999 service was devolved, and that was the fire service. We still await further devolution of 999 services like the police. So, I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's comments about not devolving any control of the fire services to the police, certainly, who remain not devolved at the moment. So, I do welcome those comments. But, in terms of consistency, would the Cabinet Secretary agree with me in terms of—? I realise you've put your proposals, but you also said it's a White Paper, so you're entertaining other opinions. In terms of co-working between the different 999 services, how do you feel that consistency of boundaries and consistency of the means of funding the different 999 services would this help co-working and co-location of emergency responses to all of the 999 emergency services? 

Talking about your White Paper, on the second page, you've set out some proposals here. Have you got a preliminary idea of what the response of the fire and rescue authorities is to your proposed reforms? Plainly, we still remember that you had a little local difficulty recently, with regard to reforming local authorities. Have you had any indication of how fire and rescue authorities view these plans, because, obviously, we wouldn't want any danger of a rerun of that debacle, would we? Thank you. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, we met, of course, at Southwark cathedral when we were both there to pay tribute to the work of the Fire Brigades Union and firefighters over the last century, and the Plaid Cymru spokesperson is absolutely right to pay tribute to you in the work that you have done in the time that you've served here, both through the legislation you pioneered, but also, I think, as being—how shall I put this gently and diplomatically—a loud and clear voice for the fire service, for firefighters and the place of the fire service in our national life. I think all of us would want to join together across the Chamber in paying tribute to you for that work over the years. 

You're not getting any more time—go on. Carry on. [Laughter.]

I'd be disappointed were you to show any leniency to me at all. [Laughter.]

But let me say this: clearly, the issues of prevention and awareness are issues that the fire services will be focusing upon in a way that perhaps they didn't in the past, and certainly not 20 or 30 years ago, and that is something that I hope we will continue to focus upon as we see a continued, I hope, decline in the overall amount of fires, particularly domestic fires.

I think it is right and proper—. And if the Member is able to take the time to read through the White Paper, he will see that we are seeking to be consistent in terms of the principles we follow in pursuing a reform programme. Those principles include localism. I want to see locally accountable, locally governed services. It is not my wish or my style to attempt to nationalise, if you like, the whole of our public services. I believe local accountability is important. I listened to an excellent lecture at lunchtime from the outgoing chief executive of the WLGA, and I was struck listening to him by the shared territory, where we share the ambitions, both himself and others, regarding the vision for the future of local government and local service delivery that we all want to see in the future. 

Clearly, we have given some consideration to the issue of boundaries and co-location of the blue light services. It is my strong view—it is a view of the Welsh Government—that policing should be devolved to this place, and we I think see the advantages of coherence in policy making and coherence in service delivery where we have a holistic way of managing and delivering absolutely core and key services. The points raised by the Member for Cardiff North during business questions of course refer to services where we do not have the same level of consistency and are unable to deliver a holistic approach to policy, and I think we see the consequences of that in its impact on people up and down our country.

Can I say, I have pursued, in my time here, the issues of co-location and co-working between the blue light services? I hope that the reforms we've put in place will be reforms that will enable that to continue, and I hope that we will see more co-location and more co-working in the future. In terms of the view that the fire and rescue authorities take to these matters, being a reforming Minister in this country can be a difficult task. Wales is a beautiful, wonderful country, full of conservative people for whom reform can sometimes be very, very difficult, and what I have to say to the Member is that this is a radical Government and we do seek radical reform. The Member can decide whether he sits as part of a reforming Assembly or not, and that is a matter for him to take forward, but I will say to you, in my experience of this place, when we are reforming, when we are looking towards putting in place structures that will serve us into the future, then we are delivering at our best for the people we seek to represent.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement here today. I've got a couple of questions for you. Firstly, will you join with me in congratulating the extrication team from the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service? Not only are they now five times UK national champions, but, for the third year in succession, they recently won the world rescue organisation challenge in Cape Town, firmly putting South Wales Fire and Rescue Service on the map.

With regard to the consultation document, I notice your comments about governance arrangements. I'm not convinced that Cabinet members are better placed to offer scrutiny than backbenchers, who may hold senior scrutiny roles. For example, there's no requirement for councillors sitting on police and crime panels or local health boards to be executive members, and I'm concerned that this could lead to a hollowing out, with a small executive doing more and more and scope for backbench councillors being reduced. I'd be interested in your response to this.

Thirdly, I note the comments around reducing the size of authorities. However, I know authorities are required by statute to have a variety of standing committees, and a larger fire authority, of course, means that these are more manageable. What consideration have you placed on how this would work in practice?

Finally, in terms of the funding model, I do see the benefits of moving to a precept model, and, when I've met with the south Wales service, I've always been impressed by all that they do. I'd welcome more information around ministerial intervention, though, about what could happen when authorities don't actually agree on the level of the precept. So, for example, if it was just one authority that disagreed and the others agreed on the level of the precept, what would happen in that case? Because I'm concerned that that could lead to some potential problems.

I'm grateful to the Member for her general welcome for the White Paper, and I'd certainly want to join her in congratulating the south Wales extrication team on the world rescue challenge that they have succeeded in winning again. It is one of the great pleasures of elected office that we all share the opportunity to meet people who perform such fantastic roles within our communities, and, certainly, I try to spend time talking to firefighters who are on the front line, as it were, delivering the services that we all need to see in our community. Can I say this? When I stood in the Rhondda talking to the firefighters who had just come back from Saddleworth and talking to firefighters who were dealing with the moorland fires across south Wales over the summer, I was struck by their professionalism, by their knowledge—sheer knowledge—and understanding of the threats that our communities were facing, but also their commitment to use that knowledge, to use that experience, in order to protect our people and our communities, and I think that's something that strikes me time and time again.

In terms of the role of backbench councillors, what we're seeking to do is to ensure that we have the levels of governance that are in place that can provide us with the assurance that we require in order to deliver both the local scrutiny and accountability—which we want to hold locally rather than create more national structures—but, at the same time, ensure that we do have the ability to link the work of the fire service into the work of other services being delivered by that authority. The points that were made by the Conservatives—by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, I'm sorry—in this matter are quite important, because, in the same way as we want to see the devolution of policing to ensure that we have the coherence of ability to respond to and plan service interventions, we also want to have that same coherence between local authorities and the blue light services. And it is felt, and I feel, that by having an executive councillor or a cabinet member serving on the fire authority then we will have that link, and we will have more, and greater, coherence. Clearly, that is a debate that we will have over the coming months.

In terms of the funding models, I'm anxious that we are able to put in place a structure whereby local government and the fire and rescue authorities are able to jointly work and jointly agree a budget for the future. That is what I want. The Member quite rightly identifies areas where that can potentially not happen and where there are problems within that. Clearly, there would need to be backstop powers here to resolve that. What we're suggesting in this White Paper is that the backstop provides powers for Ministers, but powers only to intervene under certain circumstances and then to intervene to deliver a budget that is no higher than the fire and rescue authority proposes. So, those powers are delineated, if you like, or certainly have parameters beyond which a Minister could not intervene. But I see those as very much backstop powers that would enable an authority and a fire and rescue authority to reach agreement and to adjudicate if they're unable to do that. But I don't see those powers as being powers that would be available to a Minister unless the locally held powers, and unless the local authorities involved, were unable to reach agreement between themselves.

Thank you. And, finally, Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think I will start by saying we all owe a debt of gratitude to firefighters who enter buildings when the rest of us are leaving. A huge amount of work has been done on fire prevention, and credit has been paid to you and the sprinkler system, but the huge amount that's done by the fire service in going out and putting smoke alarms in houses have obviously saved many hundreds of lives.

I was hoping this statement would have involved the reconfiguration of fire and rescue services. I have long been of the view that a mid and west Wales fire and rescue service makes little operational sense. A major fire in Welshpool, for example, will want tenders from Wrexham; it won't want them from Swansea or Neath Port Talbot.

On governance, there is a substantial democratic deficit. This is not unique to the fire and rescue service; it covers all joint working. That's why people have some concerns over joint working. How will changing the current membership of fire and rescue authorities ensure that members are accountable to their electorate? Why not have a report from the fire and rescue to a scrutiny committee at each council, or, better still, have an annual report from the chief fire officer and the fire authority to a council meeting? How will appointing non-council members and reducing the number of councillors involved improve accountability?

On funding, can the Cabinet Secretary name another council service that would not like to change the fire and rescue authorities' ability to levy on the councils concerned? I think that both education and social services would leap at the chance to have this opportunity. So, we do need a better method of funding fire services because they are funded entirely differently. And it didn't matter when we had a growing amount of money in the public services; it does matter now. And I think that the Cabinet Secretary is right—we should not be afraid of change, but what we should always do is make sure change is for the better, not for the worse.

I always welcome a contribution from the Member for Swansea East to the debate on reconfiguration of local services, and the consistency he shows in his contributions is sometimes to be welcomed.

Can I say—? Can I say that I agree with the points that he's made? And can I say also that, in many ways, we have inherited systems and structures from the past and that it is our duty and responsibility to ensure that they are fit for the future? And it is our responsibility, therefore, to look at those processes and structures to ensure that, periodically, we do have the opportunity to give the sort of considered thinking that these matters demand of us. In terms of the suggestions he's made over reports to scrutiny committees of local authorities, I very much would welcome that. Do you know, one of the debates and discussions we have around the powers held in local government and elsewhere forgets that the power of a local authority isn't simply the powers that are provided to it by statute, but the power it has as an elected body to represent the interests of the people it serves? As such, it can demand those reports, it can demand that people appear to give evidence, it can create the structures of scrutiny, and it doesn't need statute to do that, and it certainly doesn't need a Minister's blessing in order to do that. That is a matter for local government and I would encourage all local authorities across the whole of the country to ensure that they take forward their scrutiny function with that creative approach, if you like, which isn't delineated simply by what they're able to do or compelled to do by law. So, I'd certainly welcome that. 

In terms of the points that he makes—and I will try to make good time, Deputy Presiding Officer—I have considered the issue of boundaries, and it was a point raised, of course, by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson as well. At the moment, I do not believe that the case has been made for a significant change to any of the boundaries or the numbers of the current fire and rescue authorities. But what I am not doing is closing the door to such change, were that case to be made. Now, it is clearly possible to point to communities either side of any border and to say that those communities should work together in order to deliver services. That's the easiest thing in the world to do, and I accept that, clearly, in the example quoted, those authorities would, I would anticipate, work together to deliver the services they require. What we're talking about here is a different matter; it's about governance, and I'm yet to be convinced that there is a case for change along the lines that have been described by the Member, but my mind is not closed to that, and if he's able to present the arguments for the change he suggests, then I'm very happy to give that due consideration in the future.

In terms—. This is my final point, Deputy Presiding Officer. In terms of the point he makes on the additional I think it's two or three members that would sit on reformed boards in order to provide accountability, scrutiny and challenge, we are looking to ensure that we have the right mix of locally elected, locally accountable members who are able to provide challenge to the management of the authorities, but also to ensure that we have the skills mix within the new boards of fire and rescue authorities to ensure that we have the people there who are able to provide challenge to that board as well. That is the role of a non-executive director in many businesses up and down the country. It is a role that I would want to see performed within these new boards, but, again, this is the beginning of a consultation, not the end of a consultation, so I'd be very happy to join the debate if Members wish to contribute further over the coming months.

Thank you very much.