Community Fire Safety: Development of Community Safety Strategy - Term Paper Example

Community Fire Safety Development of Community Safety Strategy Table of Contents Contents Contents 2 1. Overview of Statistical Information Contained in MFRS IRMP Evaluation of statistical information contained in Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service’s Integrated Risk Management Plan for 2012 to 2015 suggest that they have to deal with various risks in the community despite financial uncertainties. In particular, as a result of 13.5% government grant cuts, the service has to maintain outstanding emergency response and perform risk reduction interventions with minimal number of employees . In terms of risk and ensuring community fire safety, MFRS will have to deal with the safety of 1.4 million people, 20% of which belong to the most income-deprived population in England and in greater risk of fire . This is because statistically the risk of death from fire and arson are higher in lower socio-economic group. Another is the increase in aged population living alone and with long-term limiting illness that statistically are more vulnerable to fire than any other group. Similarly, aside from strong possibility of being involve in anti-social behaviour resulting to fire, young adults from 16 to 20 years of age are also more at risk of being implicated in serious road traffic accidents . Moreover, although Merseyside is dominated by White at 95.11% Christian at 82.4%, racial or religion-related hate crime can place the community at risk particularly when a particular group result to arson as means of attack . In Merseyside, 40% of the population are children and pensioners while 10% are with disability. These figures suggest that around 50% of the population is vulnerable and in high risk of fire-related deaths and injuries. The 2012 Risk Map of Merseyside (Figure 1) suggests that there are 78 high risk (Red) and 444 medium risk (Yellow) areas under MFRS responsibility . In essence, these facts require MFRS to formulate and effective solution and upgrade both their prevention and response standards in relation to increasing area of risks. Figure 1- MFRS 2012 Risk Map 2. Identified Societal Risks 2.1 High fire-related deaths and injuries in income-deprived population In , there is a strong link between fire-related deaths and lower-socioeconomic status (p.14) thus they must prioritise those in Liverpool, Sefton, Wirral, Knowsley and St Helens. These localities belong the top 20% of the most income-deprived areas and considered hot spots in MFRS’s 2012 risk map . Moreover, arson rates in these areas are higher compared to prosperous communities . This information suggests that MFRS will need to focus its community safety initiative on social dimension of fire mostly affecting those in need . By analysis, the hot spots in Figure 1 are scattered and noted that aside from high risk areas the MFRS should also concentrate in medium risk areas (Yellow) which in essence is much bigger. Note that MRFS risk category and corresponding response standard in page 21 of their 2012 to 2015 IRMP is based on these risk map thus priority is given to high risk areas with 5 minutes initial attack. The difference between high and medium is only one minute which in essence is small and almost providing similar treatment in relation to high risk areas .Therefore, the community safety initiative must regard both high and medium risk areas as priority and conduct equal intervention in terms of prevention and safety. 2.2 Children, Elderly, and People with Disability As mentioned in the previous section, there are 4 main areas of concern in terms of community fire safety in Merseyside. These include vulnerable children, elderly, disabled, young adults, ethnic and religious groups. According to risk assessment should pay particular attention to people with special needs such as children, elderly, and people with disability (p.6). This is because children and the elderly in particular are slow in recognising the danger or unable to call for help quickly compared to adults. In fact, research in the UK according to , identified children and the elderly as most at risks from fires (p.23). In a 2001 study of children’s poverty and mortality in infancy and childhood suggest that children who died in fire incidents are 38 times higher in income-deprived communities . Similarly, the increasing aged population in Merseyside particularly those from 60 to 85 years of age greatly contribute to increase risk of fire-related deaths. This is because statistic shows that majority of those who died in previous fires are over 60 or people with sensory impairment and mobility . In Merseyside, this means attending to the safety of around 200,000 children and 600,000 elderly as shown in the figure below. Figure 2- Merseyside Population by Age However, children are not only victims because it is not uncommon for children to engage in fire-play and fire setting behaviour. Fire setting in children often occur in the home and encourage by curiosity, boredom, or attention seeking behaviour . Considering these facts, the above figure suggest that MFRS risk reduction efforts should focus on both fire setting and fire-related injuries and deaths among children which is almost half of the population. Moreover, there is a need for MFRS to concentrate their resources and efforts on aging population not only those 65 and above but those under 64 (statistics says over 60) who may be starting to experience the effect of aging such as limited mobility and sensory impairment. 2.3 Younger Men, Ethnicity and Religion Related Fire Setting Merseyside FRS IRMP shows that 95% of the population is white while the other 5% is a mixed of Asian, Black, and others. The population of gypsies and other similar travellers on the other hand is around 450 while the religion of 82.4% of the total population is Christian. The remaining percentage is a mixed of Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, and those with no religion stated . However, regardless of diversity level in both ethnicity and religious affiliation, occurrence of fire as a result of hate crime according to MFRS is still possible . In a study conducted in 2004, for instance, there are 2.4 million arson-related fires recorded in the UK since 1994. These include 20 schools, 4 churches or places of worship are damaged and destroyed by arson. Moreover, 40% of those found guilty of arson are juvenile ranging from 10 to 17 years of age . These fire setters are often male with behavioural problems and often motivated by either excitement, politically, socially, and religious beliefs or revenge to a particular person, group, institution, and others . As discussed above, there are evidence to suggest that people at young age, ethnicity, and religion is in some occasion is associated with incendiary fires. There is therefore a need for MFRS to focus their resources and efforts in community fire safety strategy that can alter human behaviour as discussed below. 3. Community Safety Strategy 3.1 Ensuring Community Safety Through Prevention Preventing the occurrence of fire incidents is logically much better than fighting a fire and rescuing occupants in a very dangerous or life threatening environment. However, prevention strategy requires the fire and rescue service to put more effort on planning, training, risk assessment and management. Gather up-to-date information about local risk and provide fire fighters with site specific risk information. Device generic and specific operational plan including asset and resources deployment strategy for both high and low risk areas. Create and maintain a community risk register with corresponding control measures. Train fire fighting staff in proper and safe equipment use including practical skills and site specific response procedures. Enhance staff knowledge by providing post incident seminar. Ensure safety and effectiveness of response through real-time delivery of risk information to incident commanders such as floor plans and tactical information. 3.2 Community Need and Risk Assessment Individual lifestyle is an effective determinant of risks thus it can be use to precisely predict which individual or group more vulnerable for fire and other deadly incidents. For instance, high risk areas in the risk map shown in Figure 1 were previously identified using multi-agency data of individuals living in that particular vicinity . Therefore, those in red highlighted areas should be prioritised in the fire and rescue service’s prevention activities and provided with specialised response strategy. More importantly, these activities should be linked with the FRS IRMP objectives and considered along with their financial capacity. 3.3 Ensuring Home Safety Through Community Partnership In reality, any FRS cannot effectively implement or deliver their prevention activities without community cooperation. It is therefore necessary to consider the beneficial effect of partnership with local stakeholders and agencies that can help the FRS attain their objectives. For instance, partnering with community organisations such as youth club, schools, commercial establishments, religious groups, and the media can greatly improve dissemination of safety information despite difficult financial situation of FRS. For instance, in their desire to reduce fire incidents and associated deaths and injuries in the home with limited budget, the service entered into community safety partnership with registered social landlords and launched an awareness campaign targeting fire hazards in the kitchen. This partnership enable MFRS to reduce risk in rented houses and other properties by building protective relationship with social housing landlords . 3.4 Controlling Anti-Social Behaviour and Arson Through Youth Engagement As discussed in Section 2.3, some youth actually engaged in anti social behaviour for different reasons. The main concern here is not only property damage but the life of those who will be affected by the fire. For instance, if a certain person with anti social behaviour started a fire in a home with several children and elderly then the risk of death from fire will be greater. According to MFRS IRMP for 2012 to 2015, one of their major concerns is anti social behaviour and these include not only intentional fire setting or arson but hoax calls that eventually waste FRS time and resources. Similarly civil disturbances caused by anti social behaviour such as those that were perpetrated by young individuals in South Liverpool, Sefton, and Wirral significantly reduced the quality of life in the community and wasted FRS resources . For instance, deliberate fire setting destroys buildings, negatively affect businesses and weaken local economy through unemployment. Note that in Merseyside alone, almost half of property fires were deliberately started thus preventive measures focusing in reducing anti social behaviour is critical. For the above reasons, the community safety strategy should also focus in reducing deliberate fires and reassuring the community that the fire and rescue service is in control of the situation. These can be done by building strong community partnership, early intervention, and youth engagement. The FRS must get involved in activities that can help build youth’s self-confidence, respect for themselves and the community, and increase their aspirations for a better life . However, since some anti social behaviour can cause significant damage to life and property, the law should be applied in some cases as in the case of an arsonist found guilty and sentence to five years imprisonment for starting a fire in a carpet warehouse in Liverpool. Another is the individual who was arrested and pleaded guilty to arson by deliberately setting rubbish on fire that rapidly spread to a nearby building and causing £1.7 million in property damage . As discussed in the following section, there is a need to enforce relevant legislation in order to ensure community safety. 3.5 Enforcing Legislation as Preventive Measure and Punishment The role of legislation in community safety can be viewed as both preventive measures and punishment. Some examples of these preventive measures include the fire safety provisions contained in the UK’s Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 or RRO where the need for risk assessment and general safety of everyone in the building are emphasised . Another is the Fire and Rescue Service Act 2004 specifying the role of FRS in promoting fire prevention and safety and enforcing fire safety regulation. These include preventing fire-related deaths and injuries through public education and legal enforcement. The Housing Act 2004 on the other hand contained provisions requiring government agencies to inspect and remove any risk found in dwellings . In terms of community safety strategy, the FRS, aside from prevention campaigns, has rights under the law to carry out its own investigation and present a comprehensive report about the incident . It has the right to inspect and ensure that buildings follow the UK fire prevention codes such as those contained in the Approved Document B guidance or the UK’s Building Regulations 2000 . These include taking into account or anticipating probability of a fire occurring in a particular building, fire severity, ability of structure to resist the spread of fire and smoke, adequacy of means of escape, presence or absence of warning and suppression devices, and the danger it posed to the people and nearby buildings .The community safety strategy therefore should incorporate prevention through code compliance and enforcement along with public education. Using similar community partnership strategy, the FRS should strengthen its partnership with the local police and various concerned organisations such as Crime Watch and the National Trust. As mentioned earlier, enforcement of the law in extreme circumstances should be carried out to protect the community. For instance, if the fire and rescue investigation reveals that somebody intentionally started the fire then the service should coordinate with the police who will conduct further investigation and make arrest. In essence, punishment is also a preventive measure as it discourages potential arsonist. However, punishment is not necessarily the best approach as according to , about one in four fires in the UK is intentionally set and its motive varies from malicious, voluntary, and wilful fire setting (p.38).In other words, not all fire-setting behaviour is pathological or without apparent motive. In fact, as discussed earlier, it can be “pyromania” or the desire to set fire for pleasure or juvenile fire setting (aged 10-18) and fires started by children (5-10 years of age) who do not understand the danger and consequences of fire. The last two are actually forms the majority of fire setters in UK and often performed without criminal intent . In these cases, the role of legislation as punishment may be too harsh and inappropriate and calls for innovative and vigorous prevention strategy. The role of legislation in community fire safety is clear and it can be use to prevent fire occurrences and associated deaths and injuries or as punitive instrument to deter potential fire setters. However, the first one may be more preferable considering the impact of conviction and imprisonment on young individuals. As experienced by MFRS, FRS youth engagement can make a difference in reducing youth’s negative impact on the community and fire fighting activities thus such approach can be potentially useful in other FRS. In general, along with public education in fire safety and strict enforcement of fire safety codes, partnership with relevant stakeholders in the community, and meaningful youth engagement, community safety can be achieve and enhance further. 4. References Borodzicz, E. P. (2007). Risk, Crisis and Security Management, Wiley Cote, A. E. (2003). Organizing for Fire and Rescue Services, Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC.UK Daeid, N. N. (2004). Fire Investigation, Taylor & Francis.UK DCLG (2006). Fire Safety Risk Assessment, Department for Communities and Local Government.United Kingdom Dickens, G. L., Sugarman, P. A. & Gannon, T. A. (2012). Firesetting and Mental Health: Theory, Research and Practice, Royal College of Psychiatrists.UK Eastman, N., Adshead, G., Fox, S., Latham, R. & Whyte, S. (2012). Forensic Psychiatry, OUP Oxford Fisher, B. S. & Lab, S. P. (2010). Encyclopedia of Victimology and Crime Prevention, SAGE Publications.UK Fraser, J. & Williams, R. (2013). Handbook of Forensic Science, Taylor & Francis Fuller, C. (2008). Fire and Disability 2008: Special Report, Workplace Law Group.UK MFRS (2012). Integrated Risk Management Plan 2012/15, Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service.UK Petherick, W. (2009). Serial Crime: Theoretical and Practical Issues in Behavioral Profiling, Elsevier Science.UK Spencer, N. 2008. End Child Poverty: Health Consequences of Poverty for Children [Online]. UK: GMB. TBR (2007). The Building Regulations 2000: approved document, B: Fire safety, Vol. 1: Dwellinghouses: B1 Means of warning and escape; B2 Internal fire spread (linings); B3 Internal fire spread (structure); B4 External fire spread; B5 Access and facilities for the fire service, Stationery Office.UK  Read More