FIRE FIGHTING

Wairarapa Times-Age, 26 May 1938, Page 8

FIRE FIGHTING

ATTENDANCE AT OUTBREAK IN CHRISTCHURCH STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN OF BOARD. EFFECT OF AWARD CONDITIONS. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, This Day. Revising his earlier statement concerning the distribution of the staff of the Christchurch Fire Brigade on Monday morning, when a fire gutted MacDuff’s building and the State Theatre, the chairman of the Fire Board (Mr T. M. Charters) said six men who were sleeping at the Central Station failed to answer the general alarm. He added that of the staff of 47 men, 19 brigade members and one volunteer from holiday leave attended the fire. In actual fact, the number on duty was sufficient, but the question was whether, under existing award conditions, more men would have been available in the event of the fire spreading towards Armagh Street. The actual staff position when the alarm was received, said Mr Charters, was twenty men on holiday, one on sick leave, and eight men standing by at four stations. Nineteen men turned out to Mac Duff’s, plus one volunteer from holiday leave. Of the 19 men on holiday leave, six were sleeping at headquarters and one at Sydenham. “The point is made that three men who ordinarily were to have taken their day’s leave on the day of the fire voluntarily placed themselves under the orders of the Superintendent,” said Mr Charters. “That definitely creates a wrong impression. The fact is that these three men were due to go on leave at 8 a.m., but as they were at the fire at that hour they could be asked naturally to carry on. “Regarding Mr Glover’s statement that men on leave at the station were not asked to fight the flames, I would point out that there was no response from these men to the general alarm which sounded throughout the station. There is no time to run round the station to find out who is there. If there no response, it must be assumed that no men are there. No penalty is provided for not responding. This is clearly indicated by the Auckland Superintendent’s statement; otherwise why should there be a reference to a gentleman’s agreement? Mr Glover stated that only a small number of those offering their services were accepted and that others were told to ‘stand by’ for orders, which never came. As six men who have since been found to have slept on the station did not respond to the ‘general alarm,’ it is apparent that they could not have received orders of any kind. Whether the staff is or Is not adequate to handle efficiently any potential outbreak in the city will be largely governed by the number of men left on the stations if and when further increased leave allowances are granted. I should like to assure Mr Glover that I bow not even to him in my appreciation of the work of the fire fighters of this Dominion. Any other interpretation of my remarks would be grossly unfair and entirely misleading.” DEMAND FOR INQUIRY VIEWS OF LLOYDS’ MANAGER NEED OF COMPREHENSIVE INVESTIGATION CHRISTCHURCH, This Day. The request for a public inquiry into fire-fighting methods in Christchurch was strongly supported by the manager of the local branch of Lloyds’ Insurance Company, Mr W. 8., Honour, today. Mr Honour said his questions regarding the tactics employed by the brigade in combating the fire which caused extensive damage at Mac Duff’s building and the State Theatre on Monday morning had been answered by Superintendent A. Morrison to the full satisfaction of his company, but the question did not end there. Although Superintendent Morrison had given satisfactory answers, it was now clear that factors over which he had no control contributed largely to the destruction of the buildings. At this point it was for the public authorities to step in and hold an investigation. The possibility was that some serious structural faults would be shown, and that these were the basic cause of the spread of the fire. “In the interests of the public safety, the incidence of two serious fires withing a few days of each other and the presence of factors that made the work of the brigade ineffectual to prevent heavy losses, a public inquiry into all aspects of fire-fighting in the city is warranted,” said Mr Honour. He added that his company was not looking on the question from a commercial standpoint, but thought that a lead should be given to public opinion. Any question of an inquiry would have no bearing on the settlement of claims. These were being dealt with as speedily as possible.

Mr Honour added that while the chairman of the Fire Board, Mr T. M. Charters, appeared to be mainly concerned with combating award conditions that he considered likely to affect the efficiency of the brigade, this was not the main issue. He (Mr Honour), wanted to correct any impression that might have been drawn from the remarks he made yesterday that Mr Charters was attempting to avoid a discussion of the main issue. What he had wished to imply was that if an inquiry were confined to the operation of the award, other important questions would not receive attention. In addition to an examination of the conditions prescribed in the award, the scope of investigation should be widened, so that it could deal with the strength of the brigade, the condition of equipment, the equipment itself, and the question of enrolling and training auxiliary firemen for service in cases of emergency. The inquiry should

also be comprehensive enough to deal with building by-laws, which seemed to require revision.