|
Mr. Hammond: I have a different question for the Under-Secretary. I understand entirely the intention of the clause, but it substitutes a reference to the National Assembly for Wales for every reference to the Secretary of State throughout parts 1 to 6 of the Bill, including clause 33 on pensions. When we dealt with that in the context of Scotland, we noted that pensions were not a devolved matter but remained a United Kingdom matter to be dealt with by the Secretary of State. I am therefore bound to ask why there is not a ''saving to'' provision in the clause which leaves the reference to the Secretary of State in clause 33 on pensions.
Phil Hope: In response to the hon. Member for Teignbridge, I can tell the Committee that the clause concerns powers relating to Wales and not to other regions in England. I understand that there is a new clause on which that debate may arise, and the hon. Gentleman will have the opportunity to make his points then.
On pensions, which are a reserved matter, as clause 33 makes clear, I am not certain what the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge seeks to establish.
Mr. Hammond: Perhaps I did not make myself clear. My reading of clause 59(1) is that, in every case where the words ''Secretary of State'' appear in parts 1 to 6 of the Bill, it has to be read in relation to Wales as though the words said ''National Assembly for Wales''. That would mean that the role of the Secretary of State in clause 33 is, in effect, devolved to the National Assembly. That clause has to be read as allowing the National Assembly to do all the things that it is proposed that the Secretary of State should do. My understanding was that that was not the intention, and that pensions in Wales, Scotland and England were to be dealt with by the Secretary of State from Whitehall as a reserved matter for the whole of the UK, or at least its three mainland nations.
Phil Hope: On clause 33, it is my understanding that the powers will be devolved by a subsequent transfer of functions order. I can say no more than that. I hope that it gives the Committee an explanation. If matters are not clear, I will write to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Hammond: Is the Under-Secretary saying that responsibility for matters dealt with under clause 33 is to be devolved to the National Assembly for Wales, in
Column Number: 384
the case of Wales, but that it is not to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament in the case of Scotland? If that is the case, I would find it very peculiar.
Phil Hope: The power to make a scheme will be devolved to the Scottish Executive; that is clear. In regard to Wales, the power will be devolved by a subsequent transfer of functions order, so there will not be the contradiction to which the hon. Gentleman alludes.
The Chairman: Does the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge wish to reply?
Mr. Hammond: I do not want to take up any more of the Committee's time, Sir Nicholas. I am sure that I do not understand that explanation at all, and I am equally sure that the Under-Secretary does not either. Perhaps clarification will come to us in due course.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 59, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 60 and 61 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
New Clause 6
Powers of entry: notices given electronically
'(1) This section applies if the notice required by section 44(3)(b) or (4) is transmitted to the person to whom it is required to be given (''the recipient'')—
(a) by means of an electronic communications network (within the meaning given by section 32 of the Communications Act 2003 (c. 21)), or
(b) by other means but in a form that nevertheless requires the use of apparatus by the recipient to render it intelligible.
(2) The transmission has effect as a delivery of the notice to the recipient only if he has indicated to the fire and rescue authority on whose behalf the transmission is made his willingness to receive a notice under section 44 transmitted in the form and manner used.
(3) An indication to a fire and rescue authority for the purposes of subsection (2)—
(a) must be given to the authority in any manner it requires;
(b) may be a general indication or one that is limited to notices of a particular description;
(c) must state the address to be used and must be accompanied by any other information which the authority requires for the making of the transmission;
(d) may be modified or withdrawn at any time by a notice given to the authority in any manner it requires.
(4) If the making of the transmission has been recorded in the computer system of the fire and rescue authority on whose behalf it is made, it must be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the transmission—
(a) was made to the person recorded in that system as receiving it;
(b) was made at the time recorded in that system as the time of delivery;
(c) contained the information recorded on that system in respect of it.'.—[Mr. Raynsford.]
Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.
Column Number: 385 New Clause 2
Operational and training duties
'The Secretary of State may give direction for—
(a) A fire and rescue authority to compensate employers who release employees to undertake operational and training duties under the retained duty system.
(b) A fire and rescue authority to expand monies on awards to employers in acknowledgement for their support of their community in releasing employees to undertake operational and training duties under the retained duty system.
(c) For all public sector employers where practical to support their employees who undertake operational and training duties under the retained duty system.'.—[Richard Younger-Ross.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
Richard Younger-Ross: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
I shall be exceedingly brief so that we can try to fit in the other new clauses as well. Essentially, there are three probing provisions, which I hope will elicit a response from the Under-Secretary. Paragraph (a) is intended to find out to whether there is any possibility that fire authorities will be able to make payments to employers to encourage retained firefighters. Are there any circumstances in which that could occur? Paragraph (b) is probably less controversial, and is designed to find out whether fire authorities would be empowered to make awards to employers who had been particularly good in allowing large numbers of staff to become retained firefighters.
Paragraph (c), which might be easier for the Under-Secretary to deal with, relates to what he would do to encourage public sector employers, and in particular local authorities, in that respect. They can be reluctant to allow people to become retained firefighters. What actions would he propose to encourage, push, shove or cajole them—we are, after all, talking about the same Department, the ODPM—into allowing people to become retained firefighters?
4.30 pm
Mr. Hammond: I support the hon. Gentleman's underlying intention in once again looking for ways to address the problem of recruiting and retaining enough retained firefighters. One aspect of that is incentivising potential retained firefighters. Another aspect is ensuring that, as with the Territorial Army, their employers are willing to co-operate in a scheme that may bring some indirect benefits to their operations but will certainly bring some inconveniences. We should not rule out the possibility of compensating employers.
However, I take issue—I know that it is not the hon. Gentleman's principal purpose in raising these points—with the idea that the Secretary of State could give directions. I hope that what the hon. Gentleman meant was that the Secretary of State might commit the fire authorities to doing these things. I certainly favour making the arrangements at the local level. The situation varies in different parts of the country and different authorities. I would favour the maximum
Column Number: 386
discretion for fire authority employers to put together schemes with other local employers to release retained firefighters.
Phil Hope: The new clause is intended to be supportive of the retained section of the fire service. However, the financial implications for the fire and rescue services of paragraphs (a) and (b) would be considerable, particularly in areas, not least Devon, where a large proportion of the fire cover is provided by retained staff. While the proposal in paragraph (c) would not have a direct financial impact for fire and rescue authorities, the Government believe that the support of public sector employers should not be singled out as the subject of specific legislation in this regard.
However, the Committee will be aware that on 15 December 2003 I announced a comprehensive review of the issues affecting the retained section of the service. Indeed, I did so at a meeting of the Retained Firefighters Union. That review is now under way and will examine the many factors that contribute to the recruitment and retention challenges faced by the retained section of the fire and rescue service. In addition to the issues that the hon. Member for Teignbridge raised, they will include equality and diversity, public awareness, deployment, community participation, the role, reward and conditions of service, and—I emphasise ''and''— engagement with the business community. The team that we have established will look at ways to engage effectively with a wide range of employers, both private and public, to engender better understanding of the retained firefighter's role and the benefits to the employer of encouraging and supporting their staff in undertaking this role.
The review team includes members from a variety of stakeholder groups, including the Local Government Association, CACFOA and the RFU. The review team will seek advice as appropriate.
| 
