Jump to content

Talk:Fire services in the United Kingdom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thinking behind this article

[edit]

This is very much a work in progress, it's intention is to provide a legal, structural, and organisational look at fire services in the UK, and the associated bodies and authorities that work alongside them. Please add to the article and place any comments or feedback below. Escaper7 12:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We already had an article about that at Fire brigades in the United Kingdom. Do you want to try to merge the two (at the latter location)? Morwen - Talk 12:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Despite checking, I hadn't realised the other article existed, however I'm trying to write an article that looks at the broader picture rather than simply a list of brigades. Perhaps I should move it to a different name along the lines of Fire service organisation and legislation in the UK, and delete my (partial) list of brigades. Either that or delete mine, and I'll expand the existing one which has a much clearer table. Escaper7 13:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please expand the existing one: it's not intended to be merely a list (if we split out a list it would be at List of fire brigades in the United Kingdom or somesuch. Morwen - Talk 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to sort this out by merging this article with Fire brigades in the UK but I got into a bit of a mess. Anyway, I've cut and pasted the excellent list of fire brigades from> Fire brigades in the UK, to my new article> Fire Service in the UK. Here's my logic:
  • The old title is too narrow, IS purely a list of brigades (albeit an excellent and comprehensive one)
  • It's not really encyclopaedic, and a little dated with poor sources
  • I want to write an article that takes in major legislative and government organisational changes: ie devolved govt, fire authority structure funding, the role of HMFSI (see article) hence you can see why the title 'Fire brigades in the UK', is in my opinion more appropriate.
  • So obviously no need for two lists - good for me because I can crack on with the article, which has been substantially expanded, although still a work in progress. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks. Escaper7 18:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from: Fire Brigades in the United Kingdom

[edit]

Please do not restore the above page - it is incomplete, inaccurate and considerably less comprehensive than Fire Service in the UK. If you do restore it, this article is not visible in the Wiki search. Thanks. Escaper7 00:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

[edit]

Shouldn't it be Fire Services in the United Kingdom? At the very least the "UK" at the end should be changed to "United Kingdom". David 09:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done G-Man * 19:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hang on a second! We're being a little hasty aren't we? I thought significant changes were usually discussed on Wikipedia. I appreciate anyone's comments, but started an article about the Fire Service in the UK/United Kingdom. Have either of you read the entire article? It's about a weeks worth of research/writing on my part, but that's not important it's not about FIRE SERVICES i.e a list of FRS or brigades. That's why the article I started was called the FIRE SERVICE in the UK, in other words every aspect of the fire service: DfCLG, legislation, fire authority structures, resilience FiReControl and so on. All of those things are simply part of the collective name: the FIRE SERVICE, many ie legisaltion have nothing directly to do FIRE SERVICES which is why I never called the article that. Please read it all the way through before making misleading changes to the title. However I welcome the addition of images and the expansion of the article - especially the history section which was retained from original Fire Brigades in the United Kingdom. Please discuss this before making any more substantial changes. Thanks Escaper7 13:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It should be entitled "Fire services in the United Kingdom" as far as I can see, with a plural "services" in lower case. "Fire Service in the United Kingdom" implies that there is a single fire service with that title, particularly since the article begins "The" Fire Service. I agree with the above two editors - it should be moved. It is about fire services, not a single fire service, since the UK doesn't have one. Actually no, changes don't have to be discussed if they seem correct, and I'm afraid that this one does indeed seem correct. Alternatively, rename it to "Firefighting in the United Kingdom". -- Necrothesp 22:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's clear that editors are not reading the article before adding to the comments - please do that. I have more than 20 years professional expertise in this field. We don't talk about POLICES - we talk about POLICING or POLICE FORCES. This article is about the state of The FIRE SERVICE in the UK - it's NOT about just fire and rescue authorities, nor is it about FIREFIGHTING - there is already an article on that. I appreciate the comments but I did start the article, so I know what I intended the article to be about. The Fire Service is the correct and umbrella term for Fire and Rescue Authrities, Fire Brigades, Resilience, Legislation in that field which is changing, modernisations borne out of lengthy strikes and the Bain report and many other issues. Simply pluralising the title conveys a completely different meaning. I haven't had to time to add to this yet but future sections may include airport fire services, military fire services, and the national Fire Service College - although there is an article on that. One of the coming changes to the fire service in the UK, is direct entry graduate officers and so on... Escaper7 05:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please provide a reliable reference for it officially being called the "Fire Service in the United Kingdom". To me, this still implies a single fire service, which we all know does not exist. Yes, the government often refers to "The Fire Service", as they refer to "The Police Service" (something I have experience of), as if there is a single force (which, again, there isn't of course, which is why we have named the article, quite properly, Policing in the United Kingdom). But governments do a lot of things out of ignorance or political expedience. Even if the "S" should be capitalised, should it not be "Fire Service of the United Kingdom" or "United Kingdom Fire Service"? And sorry, but I have read the article. -- Necrothesp 18:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Going purely on the way that the article is written (because I don't know that much about this subject), the way I interpret things is that there is just one fire service but multiple Fire and Rescue Services. From this, '[The?] Fire service in the United Kingdom' or 'Fire and Rescue Services in the United Kingdom' would seem the most appropriate way to go. Alternatively, the structure part of the article could indicate that there are four fire services in the UK (one for each of the Home Nations), in which case 'Fire Services ...' would be the way to go. It depends on whether there's just one person in charge of it all (one fire service) or not (four fire services). In a hurry so I hope you can understand what I'm trying to say! :-) Matthew 08:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are neither one nor four people in charge of it. Each service/brigade has its own chief officer. -- Necrothesp 11:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article makes clear that each brigade has a chief officer, but then above this there are local/regional bodies, and then above this there are four national bodies, one for each of the Home Nations. There doesn't seem to be one for the UK as a whole, so this indicates prima facie that there are four fire services in the UK rather than four branches of the same fire service. Matthew 13:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't said there's an organisation called "the" Fire Service in the United Kingdom. If the caps are the problem change it to Fire service in the United Kingdom. For those who have read the article, I would have thought it was clear that the article is about a concept, rather than an organisation. To say OF the United Kingdom seem grammatically wrong to me. It's simply meant to be an umbrella article that takes in lots of other aspects. It's not all about fire brigades/authorities or FRSs - that's why there is are references to HMFSI, CFOA, and the multitude of other central government, local government and devolved parliaments who are all involved, one way or another in the fire service in the United Kingdom. Prof Bain's 2002 report (basis of the article I started); created rapid change in the fire service. Bain says: "...having regard to the changing and developing role of the Fire Service in the United Kingdom, to inquire into and make recommendations on the future organisation and management of the Fire Service to..." If it helps, I could work that quote into the opening pars... but I feel, as is often the case on Wikipedia, that other editors simply love to pull apart new articles. Thanks for your feedback. Escaper7 12:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More thinking behind this article

[edit]

I've re-nosed this article to make it clear that it isn't about one body, but several organisations. If the feeling is that the article has a lower: 's; as in Fire service in the United Kingdom then that's fine, but most govt reports do use the upper s. It's defnitely not simply an article about a collection of fire services/brigades/FRSs. Escaper7 15:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This seems reasonable to me, and I think the lower-case 's' would remove the ambiguity that this may be referring to an organisation as opposed to the more general theme of how we in the UK are protected from fire. Matthew 16:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to lower case. That was the main problem for me - capitalisation suggests a proper name, not a concept. -- Necrothesp 18:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project: expand top

[edit]

I've expanded the top of this article to explain the legal definition of FRS as this article is now part of the fire project. Given the discussions (above) about what I called the article when I started it, it's not an unreasonable to ask why it was never called Fire and Rescue Services in the UK. It was orginally a long list of names of FRS, and I've expanded it to be more over arching. I think that name is too long, and now it's explained much higher up the article. However in the UK we have "statutory fire and rescue services..." compared to, for eg: the BAA's Airport Fire Service (anyone want to start an article on that?) which is a fire service funded soley by a commercial entity. I hope that explains things, but of course I'd welcome any comments. Escaper7 08:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent additions

[edit]

I like the recent additions to this article, but I'd like to see the tone, language and spelling brought into line with the rest of the article and most importantly SOME SOURCES. Also some of the headings were a little bizarre to say the least so I've made them more Wiki-firendly. Reagrds. Escaper7 16:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly complete

[edit]

We nearly have articles for all of the fire services in the uk. There are now only 14 left which need articles. We need a final drive to eliminate red links from the fire services infobox. G-Man * 21:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, did you leave a note on the prject page? Escaper2007 12:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scotland and Northern Ireland

[edit]

As per recent edits: It's plain wrong to say the Fire Service Act 1947 still applies to Scotland. It doesn't. The primary legislation for Scotland is The Fire Scotland Act 2005 [1]. But there have been some useful other changes including citing the fact the NI is a national FRS. Regards Escaper2007

Read the "Repeals" section of FSA 2005 and note the words re FSA 1947 :- "The whole Act except sections 26 to 27A". The Fire Service Act 1947 is still in force in Scotland, admittedly not in the original full form but it is still in force. The FSA 2005 is not the sole piece of fire legislation in SCT.

--MBRZ48 22:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC) when you read this:you know who you are stupid — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.32.89.163 (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-write

[edit]

I'm grateful for the extensive work in untangling the many legislative and structural differences in Scotland, NI, and Wales. I've re-written the first few pars to take in the fact that the Bain review did cover all the UK - that was how I orginally came to start this article (and the article on the review itself). By moving up the quotes and the stronger refs from the IRFS, I believe the top of the article makes a bit more sense and context for why there's a UK article, but I'd welcome any tweaks. The full IRFS disappeared from the web about six months ago, but another ed noted that the full report could be downloaded from FRS online: [2] Regards Escaper27 01:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:H 1074P9151079 (Medium) 1a.jpg

[edit]

Image:H 1074P9151079 (Medium) 1a.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fire services?

[edit]

"This is very much a work in progress, it's intention is to provide a legal, structural, and organisational look at fire services in the UK"

That was what you said - but the title is singular. I've read the talk but I still think this is confusing. You even objected to removing the word 'the' from the first line. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 17:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I actually said was this: This is very much a work in progress, it's intention is to provide a legal, structural, and organisational look at fire services in the UK, and the associated bodies and authorities that work alongside them. It's been the subject of much discussion and a consensus was reached - as tends to be the way on Wikipedia. I re-inserted the word the as it doesn't read well. Escaper27 (talk) 12:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Have you considered that in these post-devolution times it may make sense to have four articles (one each for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) rather than one for the United Kingdom? Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More on article name/moving

[edit]

I don't really edit much on Wikipedia nowadays, but I have noticed that this article has been moved to a different name on several occasions. As I've said on countless occasions before, I started this article based on the changes to FRS in the UK. It was Prof George Bain who said this in his root-and-branch report: "Having regard to the changing and developing role of the Fire Service in the United Kingdom, to inquire into and make recommendations on the future organisation and management of the Fire Service." - not me, hence the name. And it's not just about a collection of fire services - hence why I've moved it again. Regards Escaper27 (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


legislative structure

[edit]

I can see a lot of hard work has gone into this article, as such I don't want to go editing it willy nilly. However, it would be appreciated if you could clarify (if it's known) whether Fire Brigades have a legal duty (similar to that of the Ambulance Service and Police, though not HM Coastguard) to respond to 999 calls. An authority (common or statute law) would be brilliant. HJ Mitchell (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personnel, Ranks and Roles?

[edit]

I came by this article hoping to find details of the different personnel, ranks and roles associated with FRSs but couldn't find any.

Is it possible that someone with evidence-based knowledge of the above to author this section(s) or perhaps a separate article similar to the article Police ranks of the United Kingdom. Thanks.

General tidy-up

[edit]

My revisions on 14th and 21st October 2010 are general tidy-ups of the article (there was a lot of repetition particularly relating to "resilience" and "modernisation") and adding some images from Wikimedia Commons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Defence Fire and Rescue Service

[edit]

Given that the Defence Fire and Rescue Service if funded by the UK tax payer and is governed by a Fire authority surely it belongs in section 9: List of UK public fire and rescue services and not section 10: Other UK fire and rescue services? --Thefrood (talk) 06:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fire Safety in the UK

[edit]

I was thinking of creating a "Fire Safety in the UK" page to look at trends in fire safety overall, such as number of deaths, number of fires, attitudes towards fire safety etc. However it may fit into this page - what do other editors think? (possibly incorporating stats such as this https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/fire-statistics-monitor-april-2014-to-march-2015)Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Fire services in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fire services in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:11, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Fire services in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peterborough Volunteer Fire Brigade

[edit]

Couldn't see this in the article. I am missing it? Also, where would Peterborough Volunteer Fire Brigade go; or is it not included because it's part of Cambs? Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a mention, among other changes; there is an article on the Peterborough Volunteer Fire Brigade already. 81.145.136.27 (talk) 08:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Fire services in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Divisional officer into Fire services in the United Kingdom

[edit]

Perennial stub with no sources; may be better covered in parent article. Ost (talk) 06:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great spot. Just do it boldly and speedily. If you had done it already nobody would have objected to such an obvious merge. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:13, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you also look at Crew commander and Leading firefighter because I believe that both should be merged in too. Do you agree? 10mmsocket (talk) 07:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do agree. It may be prudent to create a section for the ranks/roles. —Ost (talk) 07:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. May be worth leaving Retained firefighter standalone. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:40, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just merge them all in one. 2001:8003:9008:1301:5D3D:FDCA:DB4F:FAA8 (talk) 06:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fire_services_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1207231628"