No smoke without fire? Analysing the competition for fire and rescue governance across the UK
The UK fire and rescue service is characterised by effective performance and a strong sense of public value and appreciation. It is somewhat surprising then that its governance has been the subject of heated debate and competition in recent years (Knight, 2013). In Wales, governance of fire and rescue is under review, while in England, there has been a focus on decentralisation (Milsted et al, 2010) and options introduced by the Policing and Crime Act (2017) that paves the way for the creation of Police Fire and Crime Commissioners. These policy developments highlight major ‘problems’ of accountability, governance and collaboration, yet academic input into these discussions remains limited. Whilst studies have offered insights into the organizational and occupational impacts of fire service reform (Murphy and Greenhalgh, 2017; Andrews, Ashworth and Meier, 2014; Matherson, et. al. 2011; Fitzgerald, 2005), there have been few scholarly analyses that evaluate the efficacy of fire and rescue governance structures and processes. A recent contribution to this discussion is provided by Farrell (2017) and building on this, this paper focuses on a comparative evaluation of different approaches to fire and rescue service governance.
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of four models of governance: fire authority, police, fire and crime commissioner, mayor and the appointed board. The analysis is oriented around six principles of good governance which incorporate elements of transparency, accountability, stakeholder engagement and effective governance. Data drawn from strategic documents, minutes, agendas, along with interviews and observations of fire governance organizations from England, Scotland and Wales are analysed in order to test the four models against principles of good governance. Findings are reviewed in the context of an increasingly fragmented approach to fire and rescue governance across the UK. The paper concludes with a reflection on the utility of the principles of good governance with a series of recommendations for future research based on their wider application beyond fire and rescue.
References:
Andrews, R., R. Ashworth and K. Meier. 2014. Representative bureaucracy and fire service performance, International Public Management Journal, 17(1), p. 1-24.
Farrell, C.M. 2017. ‘Governance Matters’, Fire and Rescue Service – Leadership and Management Perspectives, London: Springer Books.
Fitzgerald, I. 2005. ‘The Death of Corporatism? Managing Change in the Fire Service’, Personnel Review, 34, 6. p.648-662.
Knight, K. 2013. ‘Facing the Future: Findings from the Review of Effectiveness and Operations in Fire and Rescue Authorities in England’, London: HMSO.
Matheson, K. R. Manning and S. Williams, 2011, ‘From Brigade to Service: An Examination of the Role of Fire and Rescue Services in Modern Local Government’, Local Government Studies, Vol.37, no.4, p.451-465.
Milsted, D., A.G. DeSavage, M. Hood and B. Robinson. 2010. ‘Fire Futures, A Series of Options for the Future of Fire and Rescue Provision in England’, London: Communities and Local Government.
Murphy, P. and K. Greenhalgh, 2017, ‘The Gathering Storm, Modernisation, Local Alignment and Collaboration’, Fire and Rescue Service – Leadership and Management Perspectives’, London: Springer Books.
