Fire Services Review
To:
All Volunteer Fire Brigades (VFB) and Rural Fire Forces (VRFF)
From:
George Verry, UFBA Chief Executive Officer
Subject:
UFBA Submission on the Review of New Zealand’s Fire Services
Date:
29 May 2015
The Government has announced it will review and reform New Zealand’s fire services. This is the biggest
change to the emergency services sector in 40 years and will have a major impact on volunteer brigades
(VFB) and rural fire forces (VRFF).
The UFBA will make sure the powerful, collective views of the Association’s 420 VFB and VRFF members
have a significant influence on the decisions to be made.
The Government’s Discussion Document calls for submissions on three possible reform options:
enhanced status quo, a more coordinated service delivery model, or a national fire service. All three
options propose big changes for both urban and rural volunteers. It is possible that a mix of the three
options, or even a new fourth option, may be the final result - depending on the information coming back
from submissions.
The Government has asked the UFBA to help with the review. We are committed to making a
comprehensive independent submission from a volunteer perspective. Submissions close on 10 July so
we need your VFB/VRFF’s advice by 30 June 2015.
The UFBA has prepared a summary of the main issues for volunteers and asks for your feedback through
a questionnaire on:
1. Volunteer Relationships
2. Support for Volunteers
3. Organisational Leadership
4. Delivery of Non-Fire Services
5. Funding
Your responses will help us build a rich picture of volunteers’ views and reflect those to the Government.
We urge you to consult with your VFB/VRFF and complete the questionnaire.
VFB/VRFF may also make their own submission to the Department of Internal Affairs. Please also provide
any submission to the UFBA so we may take it into account.
The full Fire Services Review Discussion Document is available on our website to download at
www.ufba.org.nz/news/have_your_say_in_reviewing_fire_services
Deadline for Your Completed Questionnaire
Please complete your questionnaire as soon as possible and not later than Tuesday 30 June 2015.


Email to review@ufba.org.nz or
Post to the address below or fax to 04 237 2680.
Yours sincerely
UFBA | 86 Main Road | PO Box 56079 | Tawa, Wellington 5249
P. 04 237 0265 | F. 04 237 2680 | E. review@ufba.org.nz | W. www.ufba.org.nz
Section1: Volunteer Relationships
Discussion Document Options
1. Enhanced Status Quo: This option maintains the current relationships between VFB and the
Commission and between VRFF and their parent rural fire authority. Volunteers’ primary relationship
would remain with their brigade or fire force. Reformed legislation would require the Commission to
actively ensure the sustainability of the volunteer arms of the services.
2. Coordinated Service Delivery: This option preserves the current constitutional arrangements for VFB
and VRFF but provides for coordinated national support to all volunteer firefighters, a closer working
relationship with rural fire authorities and some funding for those authorities.
3. One National Fire Service: This option creates a new organisation made up of career, rural and urban
brigades. In this model, the new unified national fire service would directly engage volunteers and
brigades, and VRFF would be an integral part of the new national fire service, not independent
community-based societies.
Background
Before there was any fire legislation, civic-minded people within communities set up their own voluntary
brigades. Laws were steadily introduced to set common standards and interoperability between
brigades.
However, even after the establishment of the national urban fire service in 1976, VFB remained
separately constituted, community-based incorporated societies that entered into Agreements of Service
with the Commission and were then formally registered as volunteer fire brigades.
This relationship is a bit like a franchise agreement. The Agreement of Service with the Commission
effectively authorises the VFB to use the NZFS systems and brand in its community.
The provisions of the Agreement of Service require the brigade and its members to behave in ways that
protect and strengthen the national brand values. Volunteers have the right of appeal through the UFBA
to the Board and the Minister in the event of a dispute with management
Individual volunteers are attached to the Fire Service through their membership of a VFB registered with
the Commission. This keeps their connection to their community but they also serve as part of a national
service that enjoys the highest degree of public trust and confidence.
Key Issues for Volunteers

Options 1 and 2 make no changes to the status of VFB and VRFF. (Brigade engagement model)

However, Option 3 proposes that VFB and VRFF would be absorbed into the new unified national fire
service and volunteers would be directly engaged by that service. (Direct engagement model)

Would this affect VFB and VRFF and their members’ relationships with their community, their families
and their VFB/VRFF?
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
2
Volunteer Relationships—Questionnaire
Please respond to each statement by entering a number between 1 and 5 in the space where 1
indicates you agree strongly with the statement and 5 indicates you disagree strongly with the
statement.
Statement
1
Our brigade thinks the exact nature of the relationship between brigade, Fire Service and
Commission is unimportant
2
Our brigade believes the connection to our community and the support of our families is
the key issue for structuring brigade, Fire Service and Commission relationships
3
Our brigade believes the connection to communities should be strengthened by way of
formal community input to the brigade
4
Our brigade considers operational capability would be strengthened if brigades were an
integral part of a new national fire service
5
Our brigade thinks it makes little difference if volunteers are part of the fire service
through membership of their brigade or directly engaged by a new unified national fire
service
6
Our brigade thinks the brigade membership model best expresses volunteers’ connection
and commitment to their community
7
Our brigade thinks that volunteers would be attracted to serving the national fire service
under a direct engagement model
8
Our brigade thinks that under a direct engagement model volunteers would be treated
like employees
9
Our brigade values the rights of appeal through the UFBA to the Board and Minister under
the current engagement model
10
Our brigade thinks the brigade would be better run by career service officers than by
volunteer officers
11
Our brigade believes ‘volunteers managing volunteers’ is a key issue for sustaining the
volunteer ethic
12
Our brigade believes that the camaraderie of volunteers would be strengthened if all
volunteers were directly engaged by a new national fire service
1-5
Do you have any other thoughts or insights into how relationships between volunteers, brigades and fire
service should be configured? If so, please enter them in the box below. If you are a voluntary rural
force, please regard the question as applying to volunteers, VRFF and rural fire authorities.
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
3
Section 2: Support for Volunteers
Current Position
The level of support received by VFB and VRFF is not currently prescribed in legislation. In practice, this
means that support levels are determined by the funding available, allocation policies and the will of the
Commission.
The current legislation enables (but does not require) the Commission to insure members of VFB/VRFF
against accidents, injury or death, provide means of recreation, make grants for social purposes, provide
medals and gifts for long service, pay gratuities and travelling expenses and meet some of the costs of the
UFBA’s annual conference.
VFB volunteers will be familiar with the level of logistical support they receive from their local VSO and
how effective and efficient the service provided by that officer is. Support for VRFF volunteers comes
from both the parent Rural Fire Authority and from the grant subsidy scheme operated by the
Commission.
Discussion Document Options
1. Enhanced Status Quo: Under this option, the Commission would be required to actively provide for
the continued sustainability of the volunteer base. The discussion document indicates volunteers
would be better supported through attracting and supporting volunteers and building management
capability and leadership. Rural volunteers would have more support direct from the NRFA.
2. Coordinated Service Delivery: Under this option, volunteer firefighters would receive coordinated
national support and clearer leadership. The discussion document suggests the Commission would
consider more support for volunteers including improved dispute resolution processes, stronger
agreements of service and incentives to support employers and volunteers. Rural volunteers would
be better supported, equipped and trained through new service agreements with new rural fire
authorities who would probably have improved resources to support their volunteers.
3. One national fire service: Under this option, all volunteers would be in a direct relationship with the
new national service. The discussion document indicates volunteers would be better supported by
the national fire service providing the funding, equipment and support to all volunteers that they
need to service community needs. The new national service would be more responsive to assisting
brigades in need through modernised dispute resolution needs and would have improved resources
to support rural volunteers.
Issues for Volunteers

The document asserts that volunteer support would be improved under all three options. The three
options are primarily distinguished by the nature of their governance and structural arrangements.
The level of support for volunteers is not strictly a function of either governance or structure.

As the discussion document notes, there are many different ways the options are put together. Some
parts of the options could be applied to other options and, by way of example, it suggests the level of
support provided by the Commission to VFB volunteers or to VRFF via their rural fire authorities can
be altered without legislative change.

The issue for volunteers then is less connected to a particular option but more to the absolute level of
support received and how it is provided.
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
4
Support for Volunteers—Questionnaire
Please respond to each statement by entering a number between 1 and 5 in the space provided where
1 indicates you agree strongly with the statement and 5 indicates you disagree strongly with the
statement.
Statement
1
Our brigade thinks the overall level of support we currently receive is about right for the
needs of the community
2
Our brigade thinks the level of support we receive does not meet the community’s
expectations of us
3
Our brigade believes that new legislation should require the Board to foster volunteerism
in fire services regardless of the governance or structure
4
Our brigade considers there should be a senior management position responsible for
ensuring volunteer support levels meet the needs of the brigade
5
Our brigade believes the logistical support we get from our VSO is sufficient to keep the
brigade operating effectively and meeting its obligations
6
Our brigade believes our VSO has the right number of brigades to service and serves them
well
7
Our brigade believes volunteers are willing to give their time for a challenging and
rewarding experience
8
Our brigade thinks there are many management practices that affect the challenge and
reward of volunteering
9
Our brigade thinks operational volunteers should not give up their family and recreation
time to do paper work for the fire service
10
Our brigade believes it takes too long to get police and medical clearance for a new
volunteer and this affects recruitment
11
Our brigade believes respect and recognition are as important as having a modern station
and good equipment
12
Our brigade thinks volunteers should not be out of pocket for serving their community
and all expenses should be reimbursed
1-5
13 Our brigade considers the social grant from the Commission is about right for our brigade
14
Our brigade considers volunteers should retain their current rights of appeal to the Board
and Minister when in dispute with NZFS
15
Our brigade thinks we should be bulk funded for some support services so we can decide
our own priorities and buy direct
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
5
Section 3: Organisational Leadership
Discussion Document Options
1. Enhanced status quo: This option retains the current New Zealand Fire Service Commission and
National Rural Fire Authority structure with a common board exercising both functions. The
legislation would require the Chief Executive to have a strategic focus on both the urban and rural fire
sectors and the Minister would ensure the Board included members with a mix of urban and rural fire
fighting skills and experience.
2. Coordinated service delivery: This option would introduce more modern governance provisions.
The new Commission would have more oversight and coordination of rural fire authorities and would
fund some rural risk reduction activities. The new Commission would have a Chief Executive who is
also a Commissioner. A National Commander and National Rural Fire Officer would have equal status
and report to the Chief Executive. The Minister would ensure the Board included members with a
mix of urban and rural fire fighting skills and experience.
3. One national fire service: The document describes two possible structures under a single Board
accountable for all service delivery across urban and rural New Zealand. The Chief Executive would
be a Commissioner but the deputy Chief Executive positions could be divided along operations and
resource lines or along urban and rural lines.
Background
The Fire Service Commission is established as a Crown entity. This means there is a governing board
between the Minister and the Chief Executive.
The Minister appoints the Board, the Board appoints the Chief Executive and the Board is accountable to
the Minister for the financial and service performance of the organisation. Expenditure levels are set by a
process that enables the Minister to comment on proposals before they are approved by the Board and
tabled in Parliament.
Rural Fire Authorities are established as corporate bodies with individual constitutions approved by the
National Rural Fire Authority. Rural fire stakeholders appoint representatives to the Board of the
Authority and the Board has all the powers necessary to discharge its statutory functions.
Issues for Volunteers

All options incorporate proposals that would recognise in statute the critical importance of
volunteers and the need to ensure their sustainability and support.

None of the options makes provision for the Board to include people with skills and experience in
volunteer organisations or for a manager at Deputy Chief Executive level to be accountable for
volunteer support and sustainability.

The proposal for the Chief Executive to be a Commissioner under Options 2 and 3 may also have
implications for the attention the Board pays to volunteer issues.
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
6
Organisational Leadership—Questionnaire
Please respond to each statement by entering a number between 1 and 5 in the space provided where
1 indicates you agree strongly with the statement and 5 indicates you disagree strongly with the
statement.
Statement
1
Our brigade thinks the fire service governance arrangements make little difference at a
local level
2
Our brigade believes a board responsible for one unified national fire service will be
remote from local issues
3
Our brigade will always do what is right for our community regardless of the form of
governance adopted for fire services
4
Our brigade thinks the board should have at least one person who has skills and
experience in volunteer issues
5
Our brigade thinks it is sensible and efficient to bring the governance of all urban and
rural fire services under one board
6
Our brigade thinks the promotion of volunteerism should be a specific statutory function
of the Chief Executive
7
Our brigade thinks there should be three deputy Chief Executive positions, one of which
should be responsible for volunteer sustainability
8
Our brigade believes no member of the board should hold an executive position with the
Fire Service
9
Our brigade believes local communities should have a say in fire service governance
through regional advisory boards
10
Our brigade believes the differences between urban and rural fire readiness reduction
and response functions make it difficult for a single board to coordinate or govern both
sectors effectively
11
Our brigade thinks the connections between urban and rural fire management are so
close, a single board should govern both sectors
12
Our brigade thinks the Minister should receive an independent annual assessment of the
board’s performance of its governance function to foster volunteerism in fire services
1-5
Do you have any other thoughts on or insights into how fire services should be governed? If so, please
enter them in the box below.
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
7
Section 4: Delivery of Non-Fire Services
Current Position
The Fire Service is authorised by the Fire Service Act to respond to fires and to certain hazardous
substance emergencies. All other non-fire emergencies fall into a discretionary grey area.
The public expects urban fire service brigades to respond to these emergencies but they are constrained
in their ability to prepare for them, and if anything goes wrong, there may be no limitation of liability for
the firefighters involved.
Voluntary VRFF are even more constrained and are legally authorised to respond only to fires (although
many respond to non-fire emergencies).
Proposed Position
In response to the 2012 Report of the Fire Review Panel, Cabinet decided:

The Commission would be required to promote fire safety, prevent, respond to and suppress fires,
promote forest and rural fire capability, extricate trapped persons from vehicles and stabilise and
render safe hazardous substances.

The Commission would be able (but would not be required) to:


Respond to medical emergencies and maritime incidents

Perform technical rescues, including urban search and rescue, collapsed buildings, irrespirable
and explosive atmospheres, swift water and animal rescue

Provide assistance at road traffic incidents

Protect life and property following severe weather related and natural incidents

Respond to other incidents where it has the capability to do so.
The Commission would be able to authorise rural fire authorities to respond to any of the classes of
emergency above where they had the demonstrated capability to do so.
Issues for Volunteers
1. Any option adopted for reform of the legislation would incorporate the Cabinet’s decision on
mandate. The issues for volunteers are how the Commission would resource (equip, train, fund etc)
VFB/VRFF to perform the required functions.
2. Also, how would the Commission involve VFB and VRFF in decisions about the discretionary ‘may do’
functions and equip them to deliver those functions?
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
8
Delivery of Non-Fire Services—Questionnaire
Please respond to each statement by entering a number between 1 and 5 in the space provided where
1 indicates you agree strongly with the statement and 5 indicates you disagree strongly with the
statement.
Statement
1
Our brigade thinks it is important there is absolute clarity about what non-fire services
brigades are expected to deliver
2
Our brigade will always respond to calls for assistance regardless of whether it is
authorised to deliver that assistance
3
Our brigade wants assurance that firefighters acting in good faith will not be liable if
something goes wrong at a non-fire incident
4
Our brigade thinks the Cabinet decision on non-fire services will bring the position into
line with current reality
5
Our brigade believes communities should have a say in determining what functions will be
performed by which brigades
6
Our brigade believes the standards for performing any ‘may do’ function must be set at
safe but reasonable levels
7
Our brigade believes not all brigades will need to carry out all the discretionary ‘may do’
functions
8
Our brigade thinks a brigade could perform the ‘may do’ functions on a freelance basis if
the community funded it
9
Our brigade thinks the Chief Executive should be required to consult a brigade before
assigning it a ‘may do’ function
1-5
10 Our brigade welcomes the decision to allow accredited VRFF to perform non-fire services
11
Our brigade believes national, not local, resources should meet the costs of providing
authorised discretionary functions
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
9
Section 5: Funding
Current Funding Arrangements

Urban Fire Service: Levy on contracts of fire insurance. The levy is calculated on the amount for
which property is insured. The rate of levy is set by the Minister at a level sufficient to fund the
approved net expenditure of the Commission.

Rural Fire Services: A mix of local government property rates, contributions from stakeholders in
rural fire authorities and grants from the Rural Fire Fighting Fund which in turn is funded from Vote
Conservation and the levy on fire insurance.
Advantages

Cheap to collect

Levy receipts grow as more houses and buildings are constructed and insured

Insurance-based funding partly reflects risk.
Disadvantages

Some property owners under-insure or do not insure at all but still receive a service

Owners of large geographically dispersed portfolios exploit loopholes around the amount for which
property is insured

People who insure against the risk of fire also fund all the non-fire services brigades and fire forces
deliver.
Options

Apply levy to all insurance contracts of material damage not just fire insurance

Apply levy to premium rather than to amount for which property is insured

Mixed funding stream: insurance levy plus petrol/diesel/motor vehicle registration levy plus
contribution from health/ambulance/government.
Key Issues for Volunteers

Volunteer work load: Should funding arrangements encourage property owners to reduce their fire
risk?

Volunteer recruitment and retention: Should funding arrangements offer levy rebates to volunteers
and their employers?

Local community needs: Should arrangements provide some funding direct to brigades to apply to
capability in their community?

Equity and Fairness: Should contribution to cost of running fire services be broadly proportionate to
the level of benefit received?
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
10
Funding—Questionnaire
Please respond to each statement by entering a number between 1 and 5 in the space provided where
1 indicates you agree strongly with the statement and 5 indicates you disagree strongly with the
statement.
Statement
1
Our brigade just expects to be funded to meet our needs
2
Our brigade has no interest in the actual funding mechanism so long as it generates
sufficient funds for our reasonable needs
3
Our brigade believes the type of funding mechanism is important to maximise community
support for fire services
4
Our brigade considers it is important that the actual funding mechanism should
encourage property owners to reduce their fire risk
5
Our brigade thinks it is important that contributions to funding fire services should be
broadly proportionate to the benefits received
6
Our brigade wants all those who benefit from the non-fire services we provide to
contribute to the cost of providing them
7
Our brigade believes it would be easier to recruit and retain volunteers if there was a levy
rebate for volunteers and employers
8
Our brigade believes it would be helpful if urban and rural services were funded on the
same broad basis
9
Our brigade wants a transparent funding system where we can see what every nonresidential contributor pays
10
Our brigade believes the funding arrangement should have a local component directed to
local brigades
11
Our brigade believes government and local government agencies should contribute to the
cost of services on the same basis as others
12
Our brigade believes it is important new funding arrangements are simple and clear so
contributors know their liability
13
Our brigade thinks the funding arrangements should generate increased proceeds as the
need for fire service cover grows
1-5
Do you have any other thoughts or insights into funding arrangements for fire services? If so, please
enter them in the box below. If you are a VRFF, we would like your views on how the stakeholder funding
arrangements in your Rural Fire Authority are working and whether the funding arrangements could be
improved to the benefit of your fire force.
United Fire Brigades’ Association—Fire Services Review 29 May 2015
11