1

A Critical Review
Making the pieces fit

Of The Leicester, Leicestershire & Rutland Fire & Rescue Service IRMP

IRMP: Contradictory Data

Compiled By :

Representatives of the Parishes and

Towns Councils in the locale of Moira
Fire Station
Jan 2010

Presented to Members of the

Leicestershire Fire and Rescue
Service Authority

And

Other Interested Parties

Version 2
 2

Direct quote from

Fire & Rescue Service National Framework 2008-11.
Published by Communities and Local Government

Page 38. Heading: 4.16 Community Engagement & Involvement.

Fire and Rescue Authorities must:

• Have regard to any guidance issued by Communities and

Local Government in how to exercise this new duty.
• Demonstrate that they have made changes to service
provision, where appropriate, to reflect the needs and views
of local communities and to demonstrate that they have
considered the needs and views of all communities in
making these changes.

Source: National Framework

www.communities.gov.uk/documents/fire/pdf/nationalframework200811.pdfhttp://www.comm
unities.gov.uk/documents/fire/pdf/nationalframework200811.pdf
 3
Local Development Framework

Letter from District Councillor:

Ultimately it is the responsibility of the Fire service to demonstrate that they have
given due care and consideration to the LDF, to which they haven't.

In layman terms the growth in population would be demonstrated with the

expansion pro rata to risk, as risk has increased in deprived areas ie Moira &
Measham Wards, then the Leicestershire Fire & Rescue action plan should
demonstrate this, which it doesn't.

As an example, we would assume, studying the Government plan of accepted

growth, that this area would have about 2000 plus houses, additional businesses
and travellers sites (about 4 number and they too fall into high risk). If then this
was calculated into the fire officers IRMP plan's, we would need a bigger station
than Ashby and Moira put together and it would be logistically positioned closer
to Measham. This would be paid for within the overall development of the area,
as stated in the Government White paper and this clearly has not been taken into
consideration by Leicestershire Fire and Rescue.

I hope I have made the point clear but, for the sake of clarity, it is like me saying
to the fire department - here are 5 fire engines, now, how many houses do I need?
(this is as a district councillor of course). It is fully down to Leicestershire Fire &
Rescue, to plan for the Local Development Framework, as it is for the council to
plan for the 12,200 houses.

Yours Sincerely

District Councillor John Bridges

Former Cabinet Member, Responsible for Local Development Framework
 4

Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Interpretation of the Make up of the Northern Area is in
direct contradiction to the 'thorough assessment' (their words not ours) of deprivation
produced by Leicestershire County Council.

NB: As we have been prevented from showing page 5 from the Northern Review by the
LFRS please find their facts, in our graph, of the figures below. You will be able to view
the Northern Review document, in its entirety at :
http://www.leicestershire-fire.gov.uk/documents/IRMP-northern_review-2008.pdf

Page 5 LFRS. Northern Review. Socio-demographics

FSEC (Fire Safety Emergency Cover) Risk proxy
Leicestershire Fire and Rescue state that 'Socio-demographic factors are a key risk proxy for
consideration in any risk analysis process.' They also go on to say that potential Risk Factors
(PRF) from national fire research are made up of households that comprise:

• Lone pensioners
• Rented accommodation
• Single parent families
• Limiting long term illness

You will find screenshots of the locations of these risk factors within the actual document,
however we have replicated these facts for your convenience as well as adding the right hand
column relating to points using the philosophy - Points means Prizes, to highlight potential target
areas. The Fire Service state that 'It is evident that there are some station areas that have low
levels of risk in the locale.' We say that this 'appears' the case, however looking at the table
further, and questioning some of the levels of the risk groups per area, we conclude that the data
used for this display of risk in the Northern areas of Leicestershire and thus we believe that the
LFRS's interpretation is flawed. Please view our table below:
le
n

ilab
sis ciatio

Where was the

va
erm

An asso

sA

data sourced
ers

gT

mp

from?
ts

in
aly
ion

Pu
ren

es Lon

h R ward
ns

of
Pa

isk

What boundaries
g
Pe

sa

er
d

itin

s
gle
nte

mb
ne

were used ?
int
Lim
Sin

Illn
Lo

Re

Po

Nu
wit

Fire Stations
Loughborough R A A A 18 3 2 Wholetime 1 Retained
Melton A R B A 16 2 2 Retained
MOSAIC shows large
Syston A B B A 12 1 1 Retained numbers of elderly
Coalville A B B R 14 2 1 Retained 1 Wholetime Covers Priorityresidents
Area as well as
Ashby De La Zouch A B NLP A 10 1 1 Retained
younger families
Moira A B NLP R 12 1 1 Retained
'Key results from the Shepshed NLP A NLP NLP 4 1 1 Retained
compared to the rest of
Leicestershire Oakham A B NLP A 10 2 1 Retained 1 Wholetime Covers Largethe countyArea
Geographical it also
Indices of Uppingham B NLP NLP B 4 1 Covers Large Geographical Area shows higher instance
Deprivation 2007' both of privately
Points Aw arded
document states that NLP No Levels Present 0 rented and social
the population age B Below Average Levels 2 housing in the area of
85+ is projected to A Average Levels 4
Moira's patch!
R Relatively High Levels 6
increase from 1.8%
to 3.6%. The question is, do we believe what is presented before us ?
Leicestershire The decision was not based on Democratics alone. What else is considered ?
population growth is
top 5 of all shires Regarding the above table please remember that we don't know how they compiled their
(this is on pg 5 of data so it is important to state, that as we give a numerical value to it, based on their
the report) own premise that average risk is greater than no risk etc - this is the picture we get: of
which is far from one, which renders Moira Fire Station obsolete.
 5
Page 5 of the Northern Review goes on to explain that 'consideration should be given as to the
effect on communities of any proposed changes to station configuration'. When we consulted the
Fire and Rescue Services National Framework (See our previous page 2) it states a slightly
different version of this in that Fire and Rescue Authorities must 'Demonstrate that they have
made changes to service provision, where appropriate, to reflect the needs and views of local
communities and to demonstrate that they have considered the needs and views of all
communities in making these changes.'

Indices of Multiple Deprivation

The bottom 2 paragraphs of page 5 of LFRS Northern Review states that 'Overall levels of
deprivation in the county are low' and that 'The Northern area of the county is a relatively
affluent and rural location with only a few pockets of deprivation evident, mainly in the areas of
urbanisation such as Loughborough and Charnwood.'

However, in addition to the comments made above regarding MOSAIC data and our aging society,
the IMD 2007 said that '39% of North West Leicestershire's neighbourhoods lie within the
countys 20% most employment deprived neighbourhoods' and page 8 of 'Key Results from the
Leicestershire Indices of Deprivation 2007' tells a different picture to that told by
Leicestershire Fire & Rescue also. It comments that the Northern Area is the most deprived in
the county and is not 'relatively affluent' as stated in the LRMP Northern Review.

It is hard to understand why such bodies have come to two conflicting interpretations of what
appears to be the same data, as at the very bottom of page 5, you will find the internet address
of the County Council linking to what LFRS describe as 'a thorough assessment of deprivation'.
The County Council documentation can be found at www.leics.gov.uk/statistics and given that this
link is within the LFRS document one would draw the conclusion that the source data was from
the same statistics.

You will find further reference to the Northern Review in our Critical Review. Public Research -
Our Research - Our Conclusion's - Our Report starting at page 12 of this booklet.

Interestingly and show on the following page you will find statistics regarding Total Fire Trend in
the country, Regionally and Locally. Locally, for the point of clarity, directly related to those
parishes to whom the loss of Moira Fire Station will be most effected. You will see from the data
that during the period that this data is available the Local trend in Moira Fire Stations area was
bucking the trend and saw an increase in the number of Fires.
 6
The In formation below was compiled by the Office for National Statistics. This was obtained using the website
www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination and entering in the relevant ward areas or postcodes.

Count of Total Fires

Jan 02 to Dec Jan 03 to Dec Jan 04 to Dec Jan 05 to Dec Jan 06 to Dec
02 03 04 05 06
England 176789 174436 150903 140280 131258
East Midlands 16036 15128 12732 11714 10797
NW Leicestershire 187 190 204 168 196
Appleby (Ward) 3 3 12 12 12
Oakthorpe & Donisthorpe (Ward) 3 3 0 3 12
Moira (Ward) 6 6 6 9 6
Measham (Ward) 12 3 12 3 18
Total Moira Area 24 15 30 27 48

Whilst the national

trend in the above
charts show a
decrease in fires
attended, National
Statistics show an
overall increase for
parishes covered by
Moira Fire Station.
This should not be a
total surprise as the
area is listed as one
of the most deprived
7
 8

Ten Documents
For some time, the LFRS has cited ten minutes as its target response time for life threatening emergencies.
“Accepting the inevitability of a reduced service if Moira Fire station is closed” LFRS remains “unable to
estimate resultant attendance times” (Source: paragraph 56, North West Leicestershire Fire Service
Consultation Working Party, September 2009).

The excerpts taken from the following documents provide evidence that LFRS is not only unable to estimate
response times should Moira Fire Station close, but, more alarmingly, that it is unable to report response
times consistently across its entire service area. Accordingly, and in direct contradiction to the Fire and
Rescue Service National Framework 2008-11, LFRS fails to demonstrate “how prevention, protection and
response activities will be best used to mitigate the impact of risk on communities in a cost effective way”.

1 Our Plan 2009 – 2012

Our Standards of Service (excerpt from Page 12)
We will:
Aim to attend all life threatening emergency incidents within a maximum of 10 minutes. We currently achieve
this on 96.3% of occasions.

2 Performance Indicator Targets 2009 – 2012

Appendix A to Our Plan 2009 – 2012 (excerpt from Page 3)
TARGETS % change
Key Corporate Indicator ID Secondary Indicators Baseline from
2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 baseline
Incidents attended in 4.1 The percentage of life threatening
accordance with agreed emergency incidents attended 89.8% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 0.2%
requirements within a maximum of 10 minutes

3 Action Plan 2009 – 2012

Appendix B to Our Plan 2009 – 2012 (excerpt from Page 2)
4.1 Best value and high performing service, actively seeking efficiencies in conjunction with LAA partners
What are we going to do? By When? Who is Are additional How will it be monitored?
responsible? resources
resources required?
2. Improve performance reporting and April 2012 Director, No SMT; Performance Review
management arrangements Organisational and Data Scrutiny Group
Development (PRDSC); Staff Appraisals

4 Our Plan and Integrated Risk Management Plan 2009 – 2012

Consultation Outcomes (excerpt from Page 11)
5. Conclusions
Examine failure to achieve 10 min standard
Current inability to meet 10 min standard – examine volume / impact.

5 Community Safety Strategy 2009 – 2012

Analysis (excerpt from Page 7)
Collecting and presenting data in table and graphical form, whilst very useful, does not provide as full a picture
as is necessary for the effective assessment of risk and the efficient targeting of resources. All data sets will
therefore be analysed in order to draw out a qualitative impression of the trends emerging in the incidents
occurring, the potential location of future incidents and, to enable correlation between
incident type and the demographic group most likely to be affected.
 9

6 Integrated Risk Management Plan 2009 – 2012

Delivery Mechanisms and Response Standards (excerpt from Page 9)
Our standard for the time taken for the first fire engine to arrive at the scene of an incident was set in our first
IRMP at a time of 10 minutes for all calls to fire and road traffic collisions. Given the geography of the fire
authority area, this was an aspirational target which is easily achieved in urban areas but less easily achieved
in rural locations ... From this data we can see that we achieve a 10 minute attendance time to 84.9% of all
incidents.

7 Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) Proposals Aug. 2009

Our Service to You (excerpt from Page 5)
Our response time standard is to ensure that the first fire appliance attends emergencies (including road traffic
collisions as well as fires) within 10 minutes on at least 90% of occasions.

8 IRMP Communication Plan 2009

How we are Going to Communicate with You (excerpt from Page 1)
Integrated Risk Management Plan 2009-
2009-12
This document will give you access to Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service’s Communications Plan for the
three month period of consultation. If you have any comments or would like further information, please email
us at consultation@lfrs.org

9 IRMP Response to Public Consultation 9th December 2009

Appendix 1 Chief Fire & Rescue Officer's Response (excerpt from Section 9, page 1)
9.4 As the proposals represent significant change, they have not been recommended lightly. The IRMP
process presents the opportunity to set out locally determined preventative strategies and emergency
response arrangements based on our own assessment of risk to our community. Furthermore, the proposals
have been set out within an operating environment shaped by three principal conditions:

• Where Fire & Rescue Authorities must challenge themselves and their CFOs to improve efficiency as
well as performance

• Where Fire & Rescue Authorities lead communities by taking hard decisions affecting staffing levels
and deployment in the interests of efficiency.

• Where Fire & Rescue Authorities have the right information to justify those decisions.

10 Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Fire Authority(excerpt from Page 5)

th
Organisational Assessment, Dated 9 December 2009 (http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/)
Reduce the impact of fire and other emergencies on our communities
The time it takes fire appliances to get to incidents has been reviewed and tougher targets adopted to give
greater protection to the public. Performance against these new targets has been very good. 98 per cent of
fires where there was a potential risk to life were attended in less than 10 minutes and 9 out of 10 serious road
traffic collisions. This is a substantial improvement from the previous year.

Ten Minutes
 10

HM Government Code of Practice

Fire and Resilience Guidance
MRS Code of Conduct

Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Services commissioned

ORS to conduct two consultation exercises for its IRMP.
Neither met the stringent requirements of the Statutory
Duty to Consult. This is a prerequisite for the Secretary of
State to approve a fire station closure.

Our Plan – Consultation Outcomes
th
Presented to CFA members on 11 February
2009, this LFRS document reported on a 12
week consultation period that ended on 7
January 2009.
Statistics presented, such as in the chart
above, do not qualify whether responses were
taken from the entire consultation sample,
which included many thousands of petition
signatures, or merely the ORS survey of some
437 respondents.
The document further states on page 4, that:
some respondents given the online link may
have completed a paper version. Without
certain knowledge of the extent of such
duplication, the potential for data bias is
unquantifiable and therefore accurate
representation of relevant sectors of the
community and the economy cannot
ascertained.
Criterion 4 of the HM Government Code of
Practice requires consultation to be clearly
targeted. Fire and resilience Guidance, Section
4 suggests that surveys may require an
understanding of sampling techniques and
quantitative analytical skills. And the MRS
Code of Conduct, Sections B49 – 61 sets out
the requirements for data validity to be
assessed.
11
October 2009, ORS Consultation Report
Despite assertions that ORS is an MRS
th company partner, there are numerous
documented accounts querying the conduct,
data and interpretation from this consultation.
th
On 20 October 2009, Geraint Jones CC
reported a number of concerns e-mailed to
him by constituents. He was told: No tapes
are available to anyone other than ORS –
and they have no doubt been destroyed by
now. Yet section B50 of the MRS Code of
Conduct states: Members must comply with
reasonable requests to make available to
anyone the technical information necessary
to assess the validity of any published
findings from a research project.
th
On 9 December, at the CFA Meeting
queries were raised as to: the inconsistency
of reporting, with specific regard to
respondent numbers; the proportionality of
the sample taken with specific regard to the
under representation of interested parties;
and the incongruence of a random sampling
methodology with the qualitative approach
be adopted.
Criterion 6 of the HM Government Code of
Practice states that responses should be
analysed carefully, with clear feedback
provided. Fire and resilience Guidance,
Section 5, requires the consultation process
to be open and transparent. And the MRS
Code of Conduct, Section B49, stipulates
that members must ensure that conclusions
are clearly and adequately supported by the
data.
 12
Review Summary The Critical Review

The Save Moira Fire Station Action Group
has compiled this document to highlight
some of the inconsistencies in the data
provided to support the Fire Authority case
for closure of Moira Fire Station.
The Leicestershire Fire & Rescue “IRMP”
report was based on data from the
“Northern Review” documentation which
sets the standard for Risk Analysis in the
North West Leicestershire. Their report was
also supported by various LRFS reports
published before and during the public
consultation period.
Anyone wishing to study this source
material in depth can do so by following
the links (in blue print) in this report.
Generally the public meeting's were
regarded as a defence mechanism for the
proposals rather than community
involvement and comments received from a
Public Research - Our Research - Our
Conclusion's - Our Report
Northern Review
The Northern Review was frequently
mentioned by Councillor Roffey the Chair
of both the Combined Fire Authority and
Leicestershire Fire Authority, when he
kindly attended various public meetings
in Moira Fire Stations patch.
Ultimately, our conclusion is that the
data set used for the Northern Review
was flawed. Page 5 of the Northern
Review document which can be found
http://www.leicestershire-fire.gov.uk/documents/IRMP-
northern_review-2008.pdf shows a table under
the heading Socio-demographics - FSEC
Risk Proxy.
ers

llne g
ion

ent
focus group meeting were also biased in

n
ss
Ter ng Lo
ens

Par
favour of the end decision already being a
d
eP

gle

mI
nte

iti
foregone conclusion.
Lon

Lim
Sin
Re
Fire Stations
Loughborough R A A A
Melton A R B A
We also found that, the process by which Syston A B B A
the Authority members vote on such an Coalville A B B R
Ashby De La Zouch A B NLP A
important decision, a decision that really Moira A B NLP R
could be the difference between life and Shepshed
Oakham
NLP
A
A
B
NLP
NLP
NLP
A
death, was not given the credence that it Uppingham B NLP NLP B
deserved, with Members only having a
maximum of 7 days in which to read the NLP No Levels Present
B Below Average Levels
documentation compiled by Leicestershire A Average Levels
Fire Authority, digest this and thus arrive R Relatively High Levels
at the decision meeting 'open minded.'
Above you will see our version of this
Most of the information has been sourced table. When we first viewed this table we
from Leicestershire Fire Service, could not believe the 'No Levels Present'
Leicestershire County Council or National that is detailed in the table. Upon further
Statistics. All are currently in the Public investigation of MOSAIC data, we
Domain and we have included web address confirmed the table to be incorrect.
or links so you are able to view the full MOSAIC shows large numbers of elderly
documents at your own leisure. residents as well as younger families in
the area covered by Moira Fire Station.
When compared to the rest of the county
Moira Fire Stations patch shows higher
instance of both privately rented and
social housing.
 13
The Northern Review data table of FSEC
Risk Proxy would also back up the original
IRMP plan to close Shepshed's Fire Station
also, of which prior to the Public
Consultation period being announced, was
saved and the proposal to axe
Loughborough Retained Crew. One could
not be blamed therefore in asking - are
these figures also wrong ? Loughborough
Bell Foundry district is also a recognised
Priority Area, and rented accommodation-
purely basing presumption upon the size of
the university population- would possibly
be above average levels !
QU. Where was Leicestershire Fire and
Rescue's data for the FSEC Risk Proxy
Table in page 5 of the Northern Review
sourced from and what local boundaries
were used? What is the data being
measured against? How can two
different organisations in the same
County come to such different
conclusions? The bottom of this same
page it refers to Leicestershire County
Council's thorough assessment of
deprivation at www.leics.gov.uk/statistics.
Conclusions made by Leicestershire Fire
and Rescue Service, from seemingly the
same data that Leicestershire County
Council used for establishing Priority
Areas, in the county, are in direct
contradiction. Leicestershire County
Councils IMD2007
However the Northern Review
http://www.leicestershire-fire.gov.uk/documents/IRMP-
northern_review-2008.pdf also states on page
13
under Management Information that
Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service
should revisit the socio demographics of
any area where change may occur. We
asked as part of FOI if feasibility studies
have been done regarding the impact, (the
Northern Review also states on the same
page that this should also be over the
border stations) and the answer given was
'no.' Interestingly a letter included in the
IRMP Outcome documentation shows a
letter from the Chief of Derbyshire Fire and
Rescue basically saying that any change to
Leicestershire's Service was for
Leicestershire to decide upon and not
Derbyshire. Moira Fire Engine regularly
backs up both Swadlincote (Derbyshire)
and Ashby's Pump.
The Northern Review said that the
Northern area of the county is 'relatively
affluent' with a few pockets of deprivation
evident.
Leicestershire County Council's IMD2007
is a contradiction to the Northern Review
statement as it says that 39% of NW
Leicestershire's neighbourhoods lie
within the country's 20% most
employment deprived neighbourhoods.
Page 8 of: LSR Online | Key results from the
Leicestershire Indices of Deprivation 2007 tells
us also that the northern area of the
county is the most deprived in the
County - not 'relatively affluent' as
described by the Leicestershire Fire and
Rescue's Northern Review.
'Key Results from the Leicestershire
Indices of Deprivation 2007' document
(link provided above) states that the
counties population age group 85+ is
projected to increase from 1.8 to 3.6 %
and that Leicestershire's population
growth is top 5 of all the Shires (Pg 5).
The elderly are classed as an 'at risk'
group by rescue services.
National Studies have been carried that
show fires to be more prevalent among 'at
risk' groups. The report is ' Analysis of
fire and rescue service performance
and outcomes with reference to
population socio-demographics'. Fire
Research Series 9/2008 Available
through Communities and Local
Government. This is also referred to in
the Northern Review document.
Public Meetings - Consultation - Focus
Groups - documented results of public
opinion
Public opinion concerning the closure of
Moira Fire Station can not be
misinterpreted. The public meeting held
in Moira was attended by over 150
people. The Chair of the Fire Authority
Councillor Roffey even commented upon
this at the meeting saying that
attendance for such an event was
 14
unprecedented. The public had many
questions to ask and stories to tell of the
deserved level of public support the Fire
Station has received. Public meeting were
also attended by our now sadly departed
MP David Taylor, whom supported the
continuation of the Fire Station as well as
Prospective Parliamentary Candidates
Andrew Bridgen, Paul Reynolds and Ross
Wilmott, District Councillors, County
Councillors and Parish Councillors all
attending to support the case to keep
Moira Fire Station open - because the case
for shutting it just does not stack up. If it
did, would we have had such support ! No
we would not.
Within the public meetings questions were
asked regarding reassurances that Moira
Fire Station would remain open until
Castle Donington was at least built. These
were not given and an impression was
given that it had not even been considered.
We asked where the engine would go,
should Moira close before Castle
Donington was built and no answer could
be given. Land has not been secured for
this station build. Worryingly, timelines
and feasibility studies were not evident in
any of our findings. If plans go ahead this
means that the whole of the northern area
bordering Derbyshire would be covered by
just 1 retained engine based in Ashby De
La Zouch
Local Development Framework
We also believe that the Local Development
Framework has not been considered. This
area of NW Leicestershire sits within a few
miles of one of the biggest development
areas of England - South Derbyshire -
Woodville, Castle Gresley and Church
Greasley. The New Housing developments
in this area are evident for one and all to
see, of which increase traffic and as a
knock on effect increases usage of the
M42. Information obtained from developers
show that 75% of the buyers are young
families from Tamworth /Birmingham, and
you can assume therefore, that these
buyers are commuting to work and back,
probably still working in the region they
moved from and thus add risk to traffic on
both the M42, routes to & from these
developments, as well as the development
areas themselves.
QU. We would also like to raise the
point that did the review consider the
current and possible future locations
of other fire stations? Was this taken
into account and their relocation
considered as an option? There is
considerable evidence and universal
agreement that the locations of the other
fire stations in NWL are far from ideal.
Moira Fire Station is located in a semi-
rural location, plenty of room for
expansion and only minimal housing in
its immediate vicinity. Access and
visibility, too and from the highway is
excellent, as is its location to the A/M42
highway, of which is the link between
east and west England and has been the
scene of some horrendous accidents. The
A42 part heading North towards the M1,
is a dual carriageway with no hard
shoulder, South bound is a very long
stretch of one of the most busiest
highways in England and Moira coverers
both the Appleby magna Service Area
junction down to Tamworth Service Area
Junction. Most accidents on this highway
require at least 2 engines in attendance.
QU. If Moira is no longer in operation,
who else and how long before the next
engine arrives? The Disruption, the
cost the Deaths. Whom will be held
accountable ?
Retained Firefighters to be offered other
posts - Have they !!?
During the consultation period, various
quotes were published relating to the
transfer of Fire Fighters to other stations.
The reality is that retained Fire Fighters
will simply be lost. As many retained
Firefighter's have alternative jobs or are
self employed as well as Firefighting, they
will not move just to stay within the
brigade, especially in today's housing
market and with a requirement of having
to live within 4 minutes of the Fire
Station, moving home would most
certainly have to be a prerequisite of any
alternative position offered. Skill sets,
experience and money would thus be
lost.
 15
We are under the opinion that
restructuring for staff has only been made
available in draft format and that no
formal documents have yet to be made
available.
Other Counties IRMP's
Another criticism is the seemingly
disregard for what else, may or may not be
happening in the other counties around
the country. The situation may be that
Leicestershire would close Stations as well
as Swadlincote, Warwickshire,
Nottinghamsire, Northamptionshire and
other counties in other areas. Such as the
Bunsfield Oil Terminal Disaster, if all
counties closed Fire Stations and lost
personnel, would there be enough
engines and personnel to cope with
disasters and incidents on this
magnitude, as well as adequate cover
back in the home county? No evidence,
yet, has been found to support cross
county comparisons took place or take
place as pert of the course?
North West Leicestershire Scrutiny
Committee Outcome
A scrutiny committee was engaged in
North West Leicestershire to review and
scrutinise the IRMP proposals. This
Committee came to the conclusion that
emergency cover should be increased in
the Castle Donington area however
thought that risks in the locale of Moira
had been underestimated and that the
justification for the closure of Moira Fire
Station had not been made. It also went
on to say that it disagreed with the
retained provision in Loughborough being
removed and that it did not want to pass
judgement on the other proposals in the
county due to lack of knowledge of the
areas concerned. The final document can
be viewed in full using the following link:
Scrutiny - North West Leicestershire District Council
Authority Member Vote
The group having attended the meeting
on the 9th Dec 2009, were shocked by
the very short length of time the
members got to review, digest, question
and understand the evidence of which
was place before them just 7 days prior
to the meeting. We would also criticise
the secretive way in which the public
including none member councillors are
allowed to ask questions. This process
was 'discovered' rather than freely made
available and ended up with only
associates of the Save Moira Fire Station
Action Team, being allowed to ask
questions or depositions. All questions
had to be made in writing to the Fire
Authorised Solicitor and Scrutiny Officer
by 12 noon the day before. No Council
contacts on our team were aware of this,
prior to our discovery, and most have
considerable experience as councillors.
Under the circumstance and importance
of this meeting, one would have assumed
that the Authority would have wanted as
much discussion and information to be
aired by the Authority Members in order
to ensure a balanced view. What would
they gain by this approach ?
Lengthened response times
At all public meetings held in the area
the chiefs admitted that response times
will increase in the area - this is an
inevitability of the proposed remaining
Fire Station being located further away.
Response times suggested to residents
would increase in parts of Moira by 6
minutes and making response already
over the 10 minutes target and be a
minimum of nearer 12 minutes for those
currently within 1/2 mile of Moira Fire
Station. This response is lengthened still
when looking at the surrounding affected
villages of Donisthorpe, Oakthorpe,
Chilcote, Appleby Magna , Measham,
Albert Village & Magna Parva.
 16
High Risk Business's in the area
We do not have the definitive list of
considered high risk Category 3 risk
business's in the area, however we can
name some with confidence and are sure
there are numerous others. The Scrutiny -
North West Leicestershire District Council Scrutiny
Committee Report said that it did not think
that the risks in the locale of Moira had
been underestimated and therefore we
would like to highlight the following
business's we consider fit into this
category: Reabrook Chemicals (Moira) is
one of largest employers in the area and
this site requires a minimum of 2 pumps
in attendance, Assured Solutions Ltd
(Measham), Plastic Omnium (Measham),
Chilcote Water Treatment Plant
(Chilcote), Snarestone Canal Tunnel
(Snarestone), Sir John Moore School
(Appleby), British Car Auctions
(Measham). Moira are also the dedicated
response jointly with Ashby Pump for
McVitee's and Arla factories in Ashby de
la Zouch

We are under the impression that the information we have uncovered so far is merely
scratching the surface. We have more research to do but should you require further
clarification of any of the points made, please do not hesitate to contact us.
17