DIVIDED FIRE CONTROL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20713, 5 November 1930, Page 8

DIVIDED FIRE CONTROL.

AN ILLOGICAL POSITION;! EXAMPLE OF NEWMARKET. ADVANTAGES OF MERGER J The decision of the Newmarket ratepayers last week to proceed with tKe formalities by which the borough will be declared a fire board area illustrates i 0 striking fashion the tendency to swell the number of public authorities in the city and emphasises the arguments in favour of a metropolitan fire district with one board and staff. The conference of fire boards held in 1927 expressed itself strongly in favour of metropolitan control in Auckland, but the enabling legj 5 . lation has not been passed and New. market has taken an individualistic lino partly no doubt because of certain ab. surd provisions of the Fire Brigades Act of J 926. Obviously the best means of improving fire protection in the little borough would have been by merging the area into the Auckland fire district, but this cannot be done unless approval is expressed through a poll of the ratepayers of both districts. Such a proceeding would be costly, particularly for the city. One Tree Hill's Arrangement. Without a merging of the Newmarket borough into the fire board district its authority could still have secured control by the fire board by arrangement, as has been done in the case of the One Tree Hill Road Board, which pays the Fire Board £SOO a year for its services. The Newmarket Borough Council did ap. proach the board, which fixed its rate at £6OO. The council considered the figure too high and decided to ask the authority of the ratepayers for the creation of a fire board district, in which case the insurance companies have representation and must bear half the cost. At present the borough is served by a volunteer brigade, the cost of which is about £450 a year. It is possible that when its fire board is created, it will follow the example of the borough council and ask the Auckland Fire Board to undertake its responsibilities, in which case the position will be very much as it might have been without all the intervening procedure. If it decides to maintain its own fire fighting service there is not the slightest doubt that a heavy expenditure will be necessary in plant, alarm system, etc. -The hydrants are 2£in. against 2Jin. in the "city, but that matter is not serious seeing that the city brigades have an accommodating joint by means of which hose equipment can be adapted. Efficiency and Economy, The main question, however, is that of general efficiency combined with economy, and it is obvious that only metropolitan control could meet the case. That there should be a pocket borough containing the possibilities of huge conflagrations, in the heart of the city fire board area yet under separate control is illogical, to say the least. Indeed, it is illogical that any borough contiguous with the city should have independent fire control. At present the Auckland Fire Board has seven stations all under the control of a single head. There is the main station in Pett Street, and others in Ponsonbv Road, Point Chevalier. Avondale. ParnelJ, Jienmera and St. lleliers. which like that of Avondale was taken over when the districts merged with the city. As already mentioned the One Tree Hill Road Board has delegated its responsibilities, to the Fire Board. There remain the stations in Mount Eden, Mount Albert, Newmarket and Ellerslie all controlled by the local authority, and those in Onehunga and Mount Boskill, which are fire districts and therefore have separate boards. Multiplicity of Control. Can it be argued that this multiplicity of fire control organisations makes for efficiency and economy ? Is it likely that any single borough, whether control is by council or board, can secure the same standard in equipment and in efficiency of personnel that prevails in a fire board district that has a system of seven stations and the means of carrying out expert inspections of auxiliary installations, and generally systematising its efforts on a wide scale ? At the present time Newmarket has a small station, a brigade that is practically volunteer, motor equipment that is not up to date, and an alarm system that could be improved. Not far along Manukau Road the Auckland Fire Board has its Parnell station. If a fire occures in Epsom just over the Newmarket boundary the Parnell brigade must speed through congested Broadway and possible the Remuera brigade might find it necessary to pass through Newmarket also. A glance at the map suggests that if Newmarket merged with the ctv district the board might be able to site the two stations in a manner that would improve protection not only for Epsom, but also for the area of growing importance around the new railway station. Possibly the Pitt Street station might be relieved of part of its responsibilities in that drection, responsibilities which now mean that the Pitt Street engines have to use Queen Street more than is necessary. Again, the Mount Roskili station might be better sited for the general needs of the outer part of the Epsom and Mount Eden districts. Fire Escape By-laws. These considerations are for expertv but one does not need to be an ex'pert in fire protection to see that until the whole area between the Tamaki and the AVhau becomes one fire district, under the control of a metropolitan board, maximum efficiency and maximum economy will not be possible. A fire board has power to make bylaws governyig fire escape facilities. The Auckland Board has recently done so and a very anomalous position in the city has thereby been cleared up. It is just as important that expert authority over fire escapes should be exercised in the outer areas, and in no place more so than in Newmarket, which has become a very important industrial area. This is another strong argument for metropolitan control. Further, if all stations were manned by one big brigade, there would be the means of general training that would make for greater skill in fire-fighting and the burden of overhead would be lightened.