17/08/04

At the beginning of the fire dispute, the Government declared that modernisation did not necessarily mean job cuts.

Two years on, I am working night duty with 50 colleagues on operational duty although two years ago it was deemed necessary to have at least 64 on duty. Due to this shortage, there are at least seven fire engines that cannot be adequately crewed.

One of these appliances is the Incident Response Unit which has been supplied for use during a terrorist attack. At a time of heightened security, and considering that the Prime Minister's constituency is in the brigade area, this seems like a potentially dangerous situation.

One of the reasons why there are fewer operational firefighters is that there has been a large increase in the number of firefighters working in the offices in order to carry out bureaucratic duties associated with modernisation. This can only have a detrimental effect on both the public and the operational staff.

This dispute is not about firefighters being greedy or not wanting to work on bank holidays. This is a political issue where the Government wants to break the FBU. The only people to suffer will be the public.

The public have received an increase in council tax, partly blamed on the increase in wages to the Fire Brigade. However, the truth is that the tax payer is paying more money for fewer operational firefighters, and firefighters are still to receive their pay rise. I wonder where the money has gone? - Name and address supplied.

YOUR readers may already know that members of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) are balloting their members in Cleveland Fire Brigade for industrial action after the breakdown of national pay talks.

Members of Cleveland Fire Authority and managers of Cleveland Fire Brigade are disappointed that many months of negotiations have stalled in this way and would like to explain the issue to the local community.

There has been much confusion and misinformation about the current state of affairs. The Government has set a modernisation agenda for the Fire Service in exchange for a 16 per cent, three-stage pay deal over three years. This was agreed in June 2003, following the last dispute and firefighters' strikes. The stages were to be paid once certain agreed criteria were satisfied.

Stage two of the pay deal ( a seven per cent increase) was due to be paid from last November, but one of the set criteria still has to be met. The 3.5 per cent was paid by the employers as a goodwill gesture in the expectation that the one issue could be resolved. This one remaining issue is stand down time and how it might apply to bank holidays.

Stand down time is essentially about the work firefighters can reasonably be expected to perform during a night shift or a bank holiday.

Agreement between the national employers and the FBU national officials was tantalisingly close before the talks broke down.

All that is required now to release the remaining 3.5 per cent, backdated to November, is for the union and employers to agree and sign up to a form of words on stand down time.

Employers and managers at Cleveland Fire Authority and Cleveland Fire Brigade have already budgeted for the pay rise to firefighters. They want to pay it, but can only do so when agreement is reached nationally.

We are all justifiably proud of the work we have done so far in providing the community we serve with the fire service it deserves. And no-one in this brigade wants to see that work undermined or our reputation tarnished.

A vote in favour of industrial action could mean the return of the military to fire brigade areas throughout Britain, possibly as soon as September. We don't want that.

We urge national representatives of both the employers and union to return to negotiations and work out a solution to this last remaining issue in a pay dispute that has already dragged on far too long. - Brenda Forster, Vice-chair, Cleveland Fire Authority.

LAW AND ORDER

I WAS at the meeting of local Conservatives to listen to Michael Howard spell out policies on law and order and it was hijacked by Ray Mallon to promote his own agenda.

I was dismayed that Conservatives will be associated with his outrageous views.

Mr Mallon boasted about his own instructions to police officers over whom he has no authority.

The police are on the front line. They are the ones who are delivering results on the dealer-a-day initiative. They are the ones who are reducing burglaries in all our areas. They are the ones tackling violent behaviour.

The officers on the streets deserve our full support.

Ray Mallon is not reducing crime anywhere in the Cleveland Force area. He is trying to hijack the credit that our police officers deserve. - Valerie Halton, Guisborough.

ON crime, no matter how hard Tony Blair and his New Labour cronies spin and smear, there is one fact they cannot avoid: the streets were safer when Michael Howard was Home Secretary than they are under Tony Blair today.

Michael Howard slashed crime by a million offences a year. Last year for the first time ever, Tony Blair presided over a million violent crimes alone.

Violent crime is up 83 per cent under Labour, there is spiralling violence in schools, prisoners are released early to re-offend, there is a growing yob culture and police are tied to their desks with red tape. New Labour's record on crime is shameful.

Tony Blair's promise to be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime" has never looked so broken or sounded so hollow.

Michael Howard's plan to reclaim Britain's crime-ridden streets will hand back freedom to the decent majority by putting a stop to those who have no respect for liberty and the law.

It is welcome and it cannot happen soon enough. - Michael Fishwick, City of Durham Conservatives.

EUROPE

THE misunderstanding about the role of a European Union Commissioner has again been demonstrated in the Press and on television.

The programme outlined the job of the Commissioner dealing with trade and concluded that, because of the work involved, Peter Mandelson could not be a strong voice for Britain.

When appointed, commissioners take an oath to look at problems in the round and not from a national allegiance standpoint. Situations in trade are continually changing and the aim of the European Union is to bring about the integration of the poorer countries into the international trade system. This means that we have to bring about changes in such things as farm subsidies. These changes cannot happen overnight but the aim is always to make them towards integration.

The problems are at the least challenging and a capable person is required to do the job. Peter Mandelson will be a strong voice from Britain in the laudable work of the Union. - Bill Morehead, Darlington.