Fire Station Closures

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Thursday 12th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Brian Mathew]

I thank the hon. Member for those points; he made them well, and I take them on. We should all think of what happened in Glasgow at the weekend.

Family members of firefighters from Wiltshire are in the Gallery, and I thank them for coming. I know of firefighters from Dorset and Wiltshire who would have liked to be here, but as on-call professionals, they are in their communities today, ensuring that cover is in place, and they will mobilise if the call comes in. We owe them all a debt of gratitude.

I have met firefighters at a number of fire stations in Wiltshire. They are dedicated local people demonstrating real pride in place, protecting their area, and they have genuine concern about what any proposals mean for fire safety in rural communities. There is a consultation taking place on the closure of eight fire stations across Dorset and Wiltshire. To put that in perspective, that is eight engines supported by nearly 100 firefighting staff who keep communities such as Bradford-on-Avon safe. The town’s fire station has served for generations, and the consequences of its closure would be profound. That goes for all eight stations listed for closure.

The crews attend over 500 incidents per year, ranging from house fires to flood response, from road traffic collisions to river rescues. Those are the emergencies that make the headlines, but the everyday call-outs are no less important to those in trouble, and they include freeing trapped livestock, assisting vulnerable residents who are stuck in their home, and ensuring that partner agencies know about any safeguarding risks.

The stations act as natural points of emergency response co-ordination for events that we hope will never happen, but for which they must always be prepared. Beyond the communities the stations serve, the closures will have an impact on the whole Dorset and Wiltshire service. More than 60% of incidents that crews from the eight stations attend are outside the station catchment area. My hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson), who is also my constituency neighbour, has written to me to say that she shares the concerns of the fire service and the many residents across Wiltshire who are worried about the impact of the closures on our community.

Last summer, firefighters from Bradford-on-Avon travelled 50 miles to tackle a large wildfire on Holt Heath in Dorset. The incident was a stark reminder of how our changing climate is adding to the burden on fire and rescue services. Wildfires, flooding and extreme weather are no longer once-in-a-generation events; they are becoming part of the operational norm. In spite of massive flooding during Storm Bert in my constituency and, indeed, this year in Devon, Cornwall and the east midlands, fire services across the country receive no specific funding for flood responses. How can we contemplate such sweeping cuts to emergency response capacity and civil resilience when, in fact, more is required?

Since my election, I have been in regular contact with Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service leadership, who have told me about the increasingly challenging funding environment. Since the merger in 2016, the service has had to find savings of over £15 million, which has led to a 15% reduction in firefighter posts and the withdrawal of second engines from five stations. Though no one disputes the need to focus on value for money, the service is already recognised as outstanding for efficiency by the independent inspectorate. The service’s current operations are lean, and ongoing modernisation is keeping capabilities up to standard, but the obvious question looms of how any further cost pressures can be absorbed.

The Government’s three-year settlement has been a welcome aid to longer-term planning. Indeed, the Minister will be quick to point out the Government’s 4.1% annual uplift over this period; that arises because they are allowing the fire authority to raise the council tax precept by £5 to offset the 19.5% decline in central Government funding between 2026 and 2029. However, at the core of that settlement is the Treasury’s assumption that the area’s council tax base, which is driven by new housing development, will increase by 1.57% annually. That forecast contrasts sharply with what has happened to actual growth in the past three years, in which it has averaged just 1%. For the coming 2026-27 financial year, the figure is now confirmed at 0.9%, far below the Treasury’s projection. That is what it will remain for the following two years, and the result is a £1.27 million annual disparity. The Government have been clear: the multi-year settlement is intended to provide greater certainty for local authorities to take sustainable long-term decisions. The Treasury’s 4.1% uplift for Dorset and Wiltshire is welcome. The service is not asking for special treatment; the request is that the means are available to achieve the funding uplift on the ground, not just in an optimistic Treasury model.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

I am grateful to my constituency neighbour for allowing me to intervene. He will know that my right hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen), who is concerned about Wilton, has written to the Minister to request a meeting. I did the same at Prime Minister’s questions yesterday. I very much look forward to that meeting—

--- Later in debate ---

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Nesil Caliskan.)

[Dr Murrison]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the issue is easy to resolve? The conundrum we are in is based on the Treasury assessment that he described, which was over-optimistic through nobody’s particular fault, but we can remedy it simply by allowing some flexibility in the precept. That would deal with the issue facing our wonderful fire and rescue service. I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to those wonderful people, particularly the volunteers, who freely give their time to keep our constituents safe.

[Brian Mathew]

I thank the right hon. Member for his comments; in fact, I will go into some details on that now. Members from all parties will recognise that rural fire services face different cost pressures compared with urban ones, and rurality is not adequately addressed in the current or previous funding formulae. We must continue that debate but, in the face of closures this summer, an urgent solution is required to safeguard our community fire services.

If the Government are not prepared to review their central funding, the only options on the table, when the Treasury’s assumptions are proven incorrect, are station closures, or additional precept flexibility for the 2027-28 financial year to address short-term funding pressures through local rather than additional central Government funding. Dorset and Wiltshire’s current precept is below the national average for stand-alone services, and a one-off correction would bridge the funding gap while keeping the precept in line with that of neighbouring services. In the consultation on closures, residents have been asked whether they are willing to pay a little more for their fire and rescue services. I urge the Minister to study their responses and act on them.

I can find no recent precedent for such a large number of fire stations being closed in one year, and with them the loss of so many frontline jobs. Once a station is closed and its site sold, there is very little chance it will be reinstated. The hit to emergency response times and community resilience is essentially irreversible.

For the average household, the fire precept amounts to less than £100 per year or £1.85 per week. For that amount, we receive what is arguably the most important insurance policy any of us can have: a well funded, well staffed and well-trained fire and rescue service, ready to respond when the worst happens. All eight stations are staffed by on-call firefighters—individuals who put their communities first and who are ready to pause their job and family life at a moment’s notice, putting themselves at risk to keep us safe.

To my mind, the question is simple. The Minister can do nothing, and the stations that have served our towns and villages for decades will close, or, by allowing some adjustments and giving the authority the opportunity to raise the funding that the Government say the Dorset and Wiltshire fire service should get via the precept, the stations will remain open, providing the emergency response, civil resilience and capacity that our communities will need in the years to come.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) on securing this important debate, and I thank him and the Minister for giving me permission to speak. I am in danger of repeating many of the points that my hon. Friend made, but they are important points, and this is an important issue.

The proposals from Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service would see the closure of eight on-call fire stations across Dorset and Wiltshire, including the stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton in my constituency of West Dorset. I recognise that decisions about station closures ultimately sit with fire authorities, not the Minister, but when the pressures driving those decisions stem from central Government funding settlements, it is only right that the Government are held to account.

If approved in the coming weeks, the closures would remove 16% of the service’s fire stations and lead to the loss of 72 firefighters. For many of the villages and towns these stations serve, they are the closest responders, and their loss would change the resilience of emergency coverage across our rural communities.

The proposed closures have understandably caused deep concern among my constituents. I have met the chief fire officer and senior management, representatives of the two firefighters’ unions and the station commanders for both Charmouth and Maiden Newton. I have also received a huge number of emails and letters from residents who are rightly worried about what the changes will mean for their safety and the safety of the many visitors who come to West Dorset each year.

The firefighters who serve our communities do extraordinary work. The stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton, as well as the six other stations, are staffed by on-call firefighters—people who live and work locally but are ready to leave their jobs and families at the drop of a hat to respond to emergencies. They do so knowing that they may be putting themselves in harm’s way to protect their neighbours. In West Dorset, they are often the first responders to road traffic collisions, particularly on dangerous rural roads such as the A35. During the summer months they respond to wildfires and heath fires, which are becoming more and more frequent as temperatures rise. They also assist during flooding incidents, which our communities have experienced repeatedly in recent years, most recently during Storm Chandra.

Since the merger that created Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service in 2016, the service has had to find more than £15 million in savings and is under real financial pressure. That has already resulted in a 15% reduction in firefighter posts and the removal of second fire engines from five stations. Under the so-called long-term funding settlement offered by this Government, the authority has a revenue budget deficit of £1.2 million in year 1, £1.5 million in year 2 and £1.7 million in year 3. Frankly, I do not think “funding settlement” is the correct phrase.

The Minister will mention the Government’s decision to allow fire authorities to raise the council tax precept by £5 per year, which is said to produce an average annual increase in funding of 4.1%, but, as has been outlined, that does not tell the full story. The central Government revenue support grant for Dorset and Wiltshire is projected to fall from £12.8 million in 2026-27 to £10.3 million by 2028-29—a reduction of nearly 20% in three years. The fair funding model has, to date, removed about £1.8 million a year from the service’s budget. Put simply, the Government expect fire services to make up the shortfall the Government have created through council tax increases.

In theory, council tax makes up 73% of fire service funding, business rates make up 11%, and revenue support grant from central Government makes up only 16%, but the underlying assumptions do not work for our rural areas. Council tax revenue depends heavily on local population growth and housing development. In many rural areas, including Dorset, the tax base is growing far more slowly than Treasury assumptions suggest. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service has already confirmed that its council tax base growth is below the levels assumed in the funding settlement.

At the same time, the service faces rising costs that it cannot control: increases in employer national insurance contributions; higher fuel costs, especially with the current conflict in the middle east; higher energy bills; and rising contract costs. That is further compounded by the fact that the funding model does not properly account for rurality. All this leaves the service in an increasingly vulnerable financial position.

[Dr Murrison]

I agree with everything the hon. Gentleman has to say. However, does he agree that the only practical way of getting Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service the funds it needs to prevent the closure of the eight stations, including at Mere in my constituency, is to allow for flexibility around the precept? Otherwise, sadly, they will close. The structural issues he has cited of course need to be addressed, but they will not help in respect of the emergency that is upon us.

[Edward Morello]

I fully accept that an increase in the precept would be one option available to the Government, but I would also like to challenge the Government on the underlying assumptions in Treasury funding models, not least with the forecast population growth and the lack of rurality in many of the funding models across the board. We are talking about fire services, but I could talk to rurality in the funding of Dorset police, Dorset NHS or any number of areas. The fact is that rural Britain is repeatedly underserved when it comes to the Treasury funding model.

The result is that stations like Charmouth are now being considered for closure, with neighbouring stations, such as Lyme Regis, expected to cover larger areas without any additional resources. If local stations close, travel distances will inevitably increase, which means longer response times for fires, road traffic collisions, flooding incidents and other emergencies. Sixty per cent of incidents that crews from the eight at-risk stations attend are outside the station catchment area. In critical, life-threatening situations, small delays will have consequences. That is particularly concerning in West Dorset, where the population increases by 42% during the summer months due to tourism. Our narrow country roads, the wider effects of rurality, seasonal visitor numbers and coastal geography all create travel difficulties that are not accounted for in the formulae. Time and again, it is rural communities that end up paying the price.

A consultation on the proposed closures is under way and, like many, I urge all my constituents to make their voices heard. But the reality is that the service is being pushed towards these decisions by the financial framework that it has to operate within. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service has already lost one fifth of its workforce since 2010. Removing another 16% of stations would push the service even further. I therefore ask the Government to look carefully at whether the current funding settlement for fire and rescue services properly reflects the needs of rural and coastal areas, and whether the current funding is undoing years of underfunding or, in reality, compounding it.

It is not hyperbole to say that, without proper funding, we are putting people’s lives at risk. I beg the Minister and the Treasury to meet Dorset and Wiltshire fire service to review the underlying assumptions and reconsider the funding settlement.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Samantha Dixon)]

I thank the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) for raising this important issue and setting out his concerns so clearly. I acknowledge the firefighters who have attended and welcome them to the Gallery. I am mindful that this is an issue of significant concern to many, including those who have travelled here today and those who feel passionately about this subject. He has quite understandably focused on proposals affecting his constituency, and I will address the points he has raised, while noting that there are, as he acknowledges, limits to central Government’s involvement in local decisions.

First, let me be clear: public safety is and always will be the main priority of this Government. I want to place on the record the Government’s deep appreciation for the dedication, professionalism and courage shown every day by firefighters and the support staff who stand behind them. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East (John Grady) pointed out, their work saves lives and provides reassurance to communities across the country, as was demonstrated in the fire near Glasgow Central station on Sunday, which shows how much we depend on the bravery and rapid response of firefighters to safeguard lives and provide reassurance in moments of real danger.

Members will appreciate that decisions on how fire and rescue services are organised, including the number and locations of fire stations, appliance availability and crewing numbers, are not decisions for the Government. I am pleased that hon. Members recognise this and that they are rightly the responsibility of the local fire and rescue authority and its chief fire officer, who are best placed to assess local needs and demands.

All FRAs have a statutory duty to produce a community risk management plan in which they set out the key challenges and risks facing their communities and how they intend to mitigate them. Decisions on fire and rescue resources, including how staff are best deployed and the location of fire stations, are matters for each FRA based on risks identified within local community risk management plans.

Let me turn to funding. After a decade of short-term settlements, 2026-27 marks a significant change, as hon. Members have recognised. It delivers the first multi-year funding agreement for local government, providing councils and FRAs with the stability and certainty required to plan ahead and invest for the long term. Under the settlement, almost £1.95 billion in core spending power will be made available to stand-alone FRAs in England, excluding North Yorkshire and Greater Manchester. That represents an average increase of 4.71% on 2025-26 levels, rising to a total increase of 12.75% by the end of the multi-year settlement period. In addition, since the provisional settlement, an extra £15 million has been secured for fire and rescue services over the multi-year settlement. That ensures a minimum uplift of 3.8% in core spending power in 2026-27 for all stand-alone fire and rescue services, with some benefiting from increases of more than 7%.

[Dr Murrison]

I welcome the multi-year settlement, and so does the fire and rescue service. However, does the Minister accept that one problem is that the assumptions on which Government support is based—the growth of council tax—cannot be tweaked up or down, because we are looking at a longer settlement period than was previously the case? That is precisely the problem that we face. The solution being offered is precept flexibility, which would keep our fire stations open. In a sense, what we are talking about is an unintended artefact of the multi-year settlement.

[Samantha Dixon]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his points. I look forward to discussing them with him further, as I will no doubt be representing the Prime Minister in our meeting. In line with usual practice, and in recognition of the views raised, the Government will continue to keep our methodology under review when calculating the core spending power of local government for future years. I have noted Members’ comments.

The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes mentioned funding pressures. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service will have access to £79.5 million in core spending power in 2026-27—a 4.1% increase compared with 2025-26. That strengthens the FRA’s ability to plan, invest and deliver for the communities it serves. Although the Government set the funding framework, decisions on how best to deploy resources to meet core responsibilities remains the responsibility of the FRA, ensuring a locally led response to local risk.

I pay particular tribute to our on-call firefighters, who balance everyday lives, jobs, families and responsibilities with the exceptional commitment of responding to emergencies. Whether they are attending a fire in a rural village or a major incident in a city centre, their readiness and bravery command the respect of the whole House. In many rural areas, on-call firefighters are not just important; they are indispensable. Those communities rely heavily on their presence, their local knowledge and ability to respond rapidly. I firmly believe that the on-call model is invaluable to the communities that it serves. Although the Government recognises the challenges for services in which the on-call model is integral to operations, it can, with innovative and strategic thinking, work and offer real resilience within fire services. With sustained collaboration between Government, fire and rescue services and fire and rescue authorities, there is real opportunity to strengthen and revitalise the on-call workforce as part of a wider workforce strategy that sees on-call staff treated and respected as the professionals that they truly are.

To support that work, the National Fire Chiefs Council has published detailed research into the sustainability of the retained duty system. This work has been shared with FRAs to inform future planning, improvement activity and local workforce strategies. The Government continue to engage closely with the sector on this important issue.

More broadly, the Government remain committed to a reform agenda that supports the sector to evolve, professionalise and thrive. I am encouraged by the work of the ministerial advisory group for fire and rescue reform, which has brought together a wide range of voices to identify good practice and remove barriers to progress. I do, however, recognise that the funding formula as it stands is out of date. We are working on reforming it for the next spending review period.

Operational decisions rightly must remain with local FRAs. I note that the Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue authority, in which the hon. Member’s party holds the majority, is consulting on these proposals. The consultation runs until 15 May, so I encourage all affected residents, firefighters and stakeholders to participate. Meanwhile, this Government will continue to support the sector with stable funding, a clear framework for reform—of the role of firefighters and FRAs and of funding—and an unwavering commitment to public safety. We will stand with firefighters as they continue to protect our communities with professionalism and courage. I thank the hon. Member once again for raising these important issues, and I look forward to working with Members across the House to ensure that our fire and rescue services remain resilient, responsive and equipped for the challenges ahead.

Question put and agreed to.