Failed fire project wasted £469m, says committee of MPs

 
Fire engine The project aimed to replace 46 fire control centres with nine state-of-the-art regional centres

Related Stories

A project to set up nine regional control centres for fire and rescue services in England was a "complete failure" and wasted £469m, MPs say.

The public accounts committee said the Firecontrol scheme had not achieved any of its objectives and that eight of the centres were empty "white elephants".

The plan to replace 46 smaller control rooms was scrapped in December 2010.

Fire Minister Bob Neill said Labour must be held accountable for the "comprehensive failure".

Margaret Hodge, who chairs the MPs' committee, said the project had been "flawed from the outset" and one of the worst wastes of public money for many years.

"The taxpayer has lost nearly half a billion pounds and eight of the completed regional control centres remain as empty and costly white elephants."

She said the project - launched in 2004 by the Labour government - had been terminated in 2010 "with none of the original objectives achieved and a minimum of £469m being wasted".

'Extraordinary failure'

Firecontrol aimed to abolish 46 local fire and rescue control rooms around the country and replace them with nine state-of-the-art centres linked by a new IT system.

The regional control centres would have covered regions defined as East, East Midlands, London, North East, North West, South East, South West, West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside.

It was hoped the project would provide a better co-ordinated response to emergencies, such as terrorist attacks, floods and rail crashes.

Scrapped regional fire control centres

  • East - Essex, Norfolk, Cambridge and Peterborough, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, and Luton and Suffolk
  • East Midlands - Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, and Northamptonshire
  • London - London Fire Brigade
  • North East - Durham and Darlington, Tyne and Wear, Cleveland and Northumberland
  • North West - Cumbria, Cheshire, Lancashire, Greater Manchester and Merseyside.
  • South East - Hampshire, Royal Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Kent, East Sussex, Buckinghamshire, Isle of Wight, Surrey and West Sussex
  • South West - Devon and Somerset, Dorset, Avon, Cornwall, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire
  • West Midlands - Staffordshire, West Midlands, Shropshire, Hereford and Worcester and Warwickshire
  • Yorkshire and Humberside - West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, Humberside and North Yorkshire

However, the MPs' report said the IT system "was simply never delivered" and that the Department for Communities and Local Government had "fatally undermined" the project by not working properly with local fire services.

"The department excluded them from decisions about the design of the regional control centres and the proposed IT solution," it added.

The cross-party committee - which heard evidence in July - also said the project had been "rushed" and got Treasury funding without proper scrutiny of feasibility and costs.

Those involved with Firecontrol also showed "an extraordinary failure of leadership", said the committee.

No-one had been made accountable, said the MPs, and senior staff "have carried on as if nothing had gone wrong" while continuing to work on other government projects.

Out of the nine buildings constructed, only the London centre has so far been transferred to the local fire and rescue service.

However, negotiations are ongoing for another four to become occupied.

The empty buildings cost the taxpayer £4m every month to maintain, the committee heard.

Margaret Hodge: "The project management was dire"

Mr Neill said the project was "the latest in Labour's catalogue of costly IT failures".

"Not for the first time, hard-working taxpayers are paying for Labour's inability to manage risks and control costs," he said.

"I welcome this report which exposes the absence of basic project management and leadership for a major undertaking. Labour must be held accountable for this comprehensive failure."

'Proper oversight'

Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union, said he welcomed the report, but added that the fallout from the project was still being felt.

"[It] failed because ministers failed to listen to the voice of control staff and their professional representatives," he said.

"We argued that the project was not resilient and there was insufficient scrutiny of costs and contracts.

"Now the present government is leaving it to local fire and rescue services to clear up the mess, making ad hoc arrangements without an overall view of national resilience.

"There needs to be proper oversight, not the closure and merger of control rooms."

A spokesman for the Department for Communities and Local Government said the failures referred to in the report had occurred in the earlier years of the project, from 2004 and 2008, which it accepted and had learned from.

"The department has put much better controls and programme management arrangements in place over the last few years to avoid such failures happening again," he said.

"The National Audit Office's report in July recognised that the department took a firm grip on the project from early 2009 and concluded that the department was justified in cancelling the project."

He added that ministers believed the most effective approach was to build on the experience of local fire and rescue services, rather than imposing solutions from central government.

 

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +7

    Comment number 491.

    Will heads roll? Probably not. Will bonuses be paid? Probably. A text book failure that looks like it was doomed to fail right from the start. If you want to know how a system works, you need to put the right questions to the right people, in this case the people who actually seemed to have been excluded from the project.

  • rate this
    +18

    Comment number 488.

    I'm a manager in the public sector and have just delivered several thousand pounds of savings against advice of my manager who said we don't need to make savings this year. Today I heard that another senior manager said recently, it will be very embarrassing if we make anymore savings as we will end up with too much money this financial year. Sadly, this epitomizes the public sector.

  • rate this
    +14

    Comment number 485.

    You should try working in the IT industry and selling to the public sector, it's absolutely criminal what they spend their money on.

    I've seen contracts awarded for over £70,000 for work other companies will provide free of charge (Wireless network surveys!) I know of IT managers blackmailed to award contracts to particular companies (called 'handouts') you have no idea how corrupt it really is.

  • rate this
    +11

    Comment number 463.

    I've left public service partly in disgust at this sort of thing -it breaks your heart to see needed money just thrown away. It is endemic in public service. I remember managers not willing to pay £70 to mend a legally important CCTV system not long after spending hundreds and hundreds on having all their own management parking bays marked out! Believe me people, you don't even know half of it!

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 406.

    No doubt there will be another Public Enquiry at more cost to the taxpayer after which no one will be held to account. No one will face any action or censure and no one but the taxpayer will be left to foot the bill.

    Why aren't the relevant Fire Services able to use these building rather than them stand idle? Could they not be put to some use rather than being left empty?

 

Comments 5 of 11

 

More UK stories

RSS

Features & Analysis

Elsewhere on the BBC

  • BeesSweet medicine

    Why are sick bees being prescribed honey? BBC Earth investigates

Programmes

  • The smartphone that answers backClick Watch

    Smartphones get smarter – the prototypes that talk and say ouch when you drop them

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.