Fire Board To Call Talks On Airport Protection

Press, Volume C, Issue 29671, 15 November 1961, Page 17

Fire Board To Call Talks On Airport Protection

The Christchurch Metropolitan Fire Board last evening decided to call a meeting of representatives of the Christchurch City Council, the National Airways Corporation, the Civil Aviation Administration, the Paparua County Council, and other interested parties, to discuss methods of 'fire-fighting and fire-protection facilities at the' Christchurch airport. The decision was reached

on a split vote after a long and at times acrimonious debate. The board was informed that the City Council would, at its meeting this evening, discuss the calling of a meeting of interested parties to improve fire-fight-ing facilities at the airport Soma members of the board

considered that the board should send representatives to the meeting to be called by the council Others considered the board should initiate a meeting itself, as it was responsible for the fire protection of property at the airport, and not play second fiddle to the council in the matter. The board decided in three separation motions, all carried on a split vote, to call a meeting; to ask the City Council for permission to hold it in the City Council Chambers; and to put forward December 6, at 4 pm., as the date and time of the meeting. It was decided to convey these decisions by letter to the City Council in time for its meeting this evening. Fire Coancil's Letter The discussion arose from a letter from the Fire Service Council dated October 27, which said the board’s responsibility was to afford fire protection to property within its district in accordance with standards of fire

risk classification. The council did not support the board’s proposal to consider negotiations aimed at taking over the crash fire protection at the Christchurch airport or, alternatively, delegating responsibilities for property fire protection to the Civil Aviation crash crew. The council said it had been advised by the Civil Aviation Administration and other Government departments that the fire protection factual fire-fighting) of air tent buildings was the responsibility of urban fire authorities; the fire-preven-tion measure on Crown-own-ed properties was the respon-

carry university traffic within the site," said Mr Lancaster. “The heavy work will take another two weeks, but there will be other work to do after that.”

sibility of the Ministry of Works; and the provision of crash fire-service facilities was the responsibility of the Civil Aviation Administration.

The Council considers that the present system of financial contribution under the Fire Services’ Act is not designed to cater for responsibilities other than those imposed by the act, and doubts also whether it would be practicable for fire authorities—particularly in some areas—to provide crash crews in conjunction with their normal responsibilities.

“In the circumstances, the council does not propose to pursue the question of calling a conference of parties concerned but, as indicated in the attached letter—suggests you include in your planning programme submissions for the provision of a substation so sited as to cater for the fire protection of the valuable assets associated

with the airport.” The board’s chairman (Mr W R. Campbell) said the City Council would be discussing this evening a proposal to call a meeting of interested parties concerning approved fire services at the airport. The board should send representatives, including its chief fire officer (Mr L. R. Osmond) to the meeting to be called by the council. Objection The board did not even know officially that the ocuncil was to hold a meeting, Mr W. Mathison said. "It is only hearsay, it is not official as far as the board is concerned.” Mr Hollander: Oh, for goodness sake. The chairman has said it. and he is nof giving away secrets. Mr Campbell: No.

Mr T. F. Perkin: This is a serious matter. The chief fire officer has said he is not happy about the fire protection we can give the airport There is £7m or £Bm of assets there. The board should initiate this meeting.

Mr W. E. Olds: We should call the meeting. We are responsible for the fire fighting, and Mr Osmond has said he is not i-ppy about the protection we can give. Mr Mathison: I agree with Mr Osmond. I went out there, too. We cannot give the protection we should. Mr Campbell: The board is giving and can give, the protection it is required to give under the act. Mr Mathison: It is a near thing. We can only just give the service we are required to give, and it is our responsibility.

Mr Hollander: It is a matter of a new sub-station.

Mr Mathison: When will that be. In five years, or 10? This is a matter of some urgency. We are not happy about the situation.

Mr Perkin moved, and Mr H. J. Reynolds seconded, that the board call a meeting. Mr Campbell moved an amendment that the board send representatives to the council meeting.

Mr Olds: What has the council to do with the responsibility? Why should the board be told what to do by outsiders? Why shouldn’t the board call the meeting itself?”

The amendment was put and lost. The motion was carried with two dissentients. Mr Olds then moved that the City Council be requested to allow the meeting to be held in the council chambers. Mr Hollander: This has been discussed fully, and I don’t want to be associated with this meeting. Mr Mathison: We are doing what we are required to do, but we are not happy about it. We should be the ones to ask for a conference at local level. Mr Olds’s motion, seconded by Mr Mathison, was carried by four votes to three. Date of Meeting Mr Olds: What about a date? Mr Hollander: How about Boxing Day? Mr Olds: We don’t want any of that Mr Mathison: This is a body running a fire service. Mr Hollander: Your meeting will be held after the one called by the. council. You can bet your boots on that. You will be rediscussing something that has already been discussed. Mr Olds: I suggest November 29. Mr Hollander: That will not be enough time. Your letter will be referred to the airport committee of the council to recommend a representative to be approved by the council. Mr Olds: I don’t know whether that is deliberate frustration or not I don’t know what has gone wrong with this meeting, Mr Chairman. Mr Hollander: You won't get your letter to the council in time for the meeting. Mr Olds: What absolute nonsense. If the secretary (Mr S. F. Marshall) will give it to me I will deliver it by my own hand in the morning. We will ask for council representatives to attend the meeting and the council will appoint them at the meeting. That is common sense. Mr Perkins: We are in charge of the fire-fighting services. Mr Olds’s motion that the date for the meeting be tentatively fixed for December 5, seconded by Mr Perkins, was carried with two dissentients.