Minutes:
(1) Mr Bone-Knell (Assistant Director Operational Services – Kent Fire and Rescue Service) said that KFRS was an active participant in the Kent Resilience Forum, whose Executive Group was chaired by Steve Demetriou (KFRS Director Operational Services). In addition, KFRS was represented on the Severe Weather Sub Group, which carried out multi-agency planning and exercising at both a local and County level. Other flood related work carried out by Service included the development of schools’ education packages in partnership with the Environment Agency. The Service had also been represented on the Kent Resilience Forum’s Pitt Review Task and Finish Group.
(2) Mr Bone-Knell went on to describe the roles of KFRS at the pre-planning stage. KFRS was a statutory consultee on matters of building control. This was a developing role and the Service aimed to become involved at an earlier stage in the planning process. KFRS represented the South East Region on the National Practitioners Forum for water-related incident. It also chaired the South East Region Task and Finish group for water-related incidents.
(3) Mr Bone-Knell then set out the national context. He quoted from the Communities and Local Government report “Facing the Challenge” which said “a statutory duty does not, in itself, ensure interoperability and commonality of equipment, training and competence. He also quoted from the Pitt Review which had suggested that if the FRS were given a statutory duty it could “facilitate and indeed direct the development of standards and accreditation and could advise on suitable capabilities with authority.” There was, however, no statutory duty placed on the FRS to become involved in flooding and water safety. The Government had developed the “Flood Rescue National Enhancement Project” (a national asset register). This had been successful in Cumbria when a number of agencies had come together.
(4) Although there was currently no legal requirement for FRAs to make provision for flooding events, Mr Bone-Knell explained that under the Civil Contingencies Act, there was a requirement to assess risk and take action. There was also an expectation within the community that the FRS would become involved. Within Kent, this expectation was reinforced by the findings of KCC’s Select Committee findings.
(5) Mr Bone-Knell briefly set out the lessons learned from the flooding in 2004 in Hereford and Worcestershire. All that County’s operational resources had needed to be deployed and support was provided by 9 other FRSs. The National Flood Support Team was established to support and co-ordinate specialist resources, including 11 specialist boat teams at the incident’s peak.
(6) Mr Bone-Knell then described the 5 Levels set out in the National Safe Working Guidance. These were
Level 1 Water Awareness (general water safety awareness training and basic land based rescue techniques)
Level 2 Water First Responder (To work safely near and in water using land based and wading techniques)
Level 3 Water Rescue Technician (specialist rescue operation)
Level 4 Water Rescue Rescue Boat Operator
Level 5 Water Rescue Incident Management (Water related incident command).
(7) Mr Bone-Knell then described KFRS’ Phase 1 Response which was aligned to the Road Traffic Collision Strategy. He explained that in areas such as Romney Marsh, every road accident had water safety implications. It was therefore necessary to address the water-related risks associated with some road traffic collisions. KFRS also had to ensure that a 15 minute response standard could be achieved. It had to provide a cadre of some 165 accredited personnel on duty at any time to respond to major flooding events and provide 132 sets of Personal Protective Equipment on front line appliances with a non mobile reserve.
(8) For Phase 2 Responses, KFRS provided 4 inland craft a reasonable attendance standard in support of Level 2 Responders, a limited capacity to allow for crew rotation and the necessary resilience to support an initial intervention for major flooding events ahead of national support arrangements.
(9) Mr Bone-Knell showed the Committee Members the original and new locations of KFRS’ flooding resources before identifying the key issues facing the Service. These were that it had no statutory duty to make arrangements for water rescue; that there was a lack of clarity about co-ordination of the overall rescue effort; and hosting and safety related issues concerning resources provided by other agencies. KFRS also needed engagement at pre-planning stages.
(10) Mr Bone-Knell concluded the presentation by saying that KFRS was making a significant investment in training and equipping its operational staff. Effective implementation of the operational strategy would ensure that the service would be able to safeguard its staff, satisfy the requirements of water-related incidents, and fulfil the expectations of local communities by providing a credible intervention in major flooding events ahead of national support arrangements.
(11) In response to a question from Mr Brazier, Mr Bone-Knell said that the FRS was awaiting further guidance on recoupment. This would need to take into account that in an event such as had occurred in Hereford and Worcestershire, the 11 additional FRS teams had needed to be housed and fed.
(12) RESOLVED to note that the Kent Fire and Rescue Service has received national recognition and awards for its role in the County’s Flood Risk Planning and to thank Mr Bone-Knell for his presentation.