What about the other claims on the Save Our Rescue website?

Understandably, the Ambulance rescue officers are upset and are trying hard to get their role back. But there is some severe truth stretching going on, and in the interests of forming a balanced opinion, I will provide some answers to their comments and insinuations on a page-by-page basis:

This page claims that after these changes, Ambulance Officers will not be able to access patients who are trapped in an isolated area to administer pain relief and treat injuries. This is not true. SCAT paramedics will still access the patient and assess/treat their injuries. But, instead of the paramedic being responsible for cutting away the train, setting up the abseiling equipment and actually extracting/hauling the person, the fire brigade will perform that role.

As further information, it should be known that it is simply not possible for an Ambulance rescue unit to set up for and perform a cliff rescue without the assistance of another service (eg SES or Fire Brigade). Why not? Because an ambulance rescue unit only consists of 2 paramedics. Regular ambulance officers are not trained to assist or operate rescue equipment. To set up a cliff rescue, for example, you need at least 5 personnel, so the Ambulance service must respond another service (like the Fire Brigade) to manage the edge anyway. While some NSWFB rescue units have only 2 operators (most have 4 or more), every firefighter has cordage/rope/abseiling training and so can form the safe working crew for the rescue.

This page makes several claims:

• The Fire Brigade have duplicated/stockpiled rescue resources/staff, achieved a secondary role and lobbied to take over rescue:

The Fire Brigade have not stockpiled rescue equipment any more than any other service keeps an appropriate amount of spare equipment for surge capability or service-exchange. As previously mentioned, many rescue tools are already carried on every fire engine as part of it's general inventory, used for a multitude of tasks other than rescue.

The fire brigade have given all firefighters basic rescue training for decades. It is part of their standard basic training and used for a variety of tasks, although they are only trained in the use of the standard equipment carried by all fire engines rather than the additional equipment carried by accredited rescue units. As for SRB-accredited rescue operators, it is against Fire Brigade policy to rescue-qualify any firefighter who is not attached to a rescue station. And if they leave that station, they are de-registered. So there has been ZERO 'stockpiling' of rescue operators.

In June 2008, the Ambulance Service and the SRB asked the Fire Brigade to provide a secondary rescue role to some Ambulance rescue stations, because the response time to the extremities of the rescue areas was unacceptable. To solve this, some existing fire stations were provided with additional equipment and training to bring them to SRB level. There was no additional staffing or vehicles required, and therefore very little additional cost.

The management of the NSWFB may well have lobbied to expand their rescue role, because as the largest and best equipped rescue service in Australia, it is a logical and fiscally responsible step to take.

• Various funding claims:

These are discussed below.

This page deals with the funding of the NSWFB and the Ambulance Service:

• 73.7% of Fire Brigade funding comes from Insurance companies, 12.3% form local govt and only 14% from state govt:

This is 100% correct. While the insurance companies may not like it these days, the origin of this funding system dates back over a century and it was instigated by the insurance companies themselves. You see, they (quite rightly) determined that it was in their best interests to have their risks well protected by fire services. So, the insurance companies actually formed their own fire brigades, 100% paid for by them. The problem was that these brigades would only attend properties insured by their own company! So areas would have several fire brigades owned by the various companies, although sometimes they would merge them and share the funding. So when it was suggested that they combine into a single fire service, the funding terms were agreed upon. The insurance companies would fund the majority, because they had the most to 'gain'. State government would fund a portion, to provide for public assets and those without insurance, and local government would contribute a portion for essentially the same reason. The share paid by the companies has actually decreased from the original 75% in the last decade or so.

• It's not fair that the insured are paying for fire services, effectively 'subsidising' the uninsured:

Sure, if everybody paid insurance, then the fire service levy would be reduced per policy. But, if the state government paid 100% of the NSWFB budget, then the burden would be on the general taxpayer rather than the insured. Is that any fairer? At present, those with the most to gain (higher value properties, vehicles etc) pay the greatest proportion of the funding, because the fire service levy is a proportion of the premium. It is quite close to a user-pays system. If you don't have a car or a house, you don't pay a fire service levy on it's insurance premium. If you own a multi-million dollar factory, then you pay a substantial fire service levy.

According to the website, between 4 and 25% of properties are uninsured in NSW. That's a mighty big margin of error, but lets assume the middle ground, meaning about 11%. This means ~89% of people in NSW (ie, the policyholders) are paying for 100% of the fire service. That's quite a good figure and certainly more appealing than many other forms of taxation subsidy. For example, only about 40% of NSW residents pay income tax. So if fire services were to be fully funded from consolidated revenue, the burden would be paid for by 40% of the people rather than the current ~89%.

• NSWFB Budget Concerns:

The site implies that the NSWFB has been wildly increasing it's budget and expenditure, while no mention is made of the Ambulance Service budgets and spending. The figures below clearly show that the spending of the Ambulance service is far outstipping that of the NSWFB.

From the services' annual reports from 2001 to 2007, the facts are as follows:

Clearly, by not publishing the even larger cost increases of the Ambulance service, the site is deceiving readers into believing that the NSWFB is on a wild spending spree, while their own service is not. The figures above clearly expose the facts of the matter. Note that the figures above are actual expenditure, not budget.

• The NSWFB have been buying vehicles, equipment, adding staff and changing rosters prior to becoming primary rescue, which is how they could assume the role so quickly:

Absolutely false. The NSWFB have not purchased any additional vehicles. The NSWFB have not recruited any additional staff. The NSWFB have not changed any rosters. The NSWFB did not purchase any additional equipment or begin additional training until after they became primary rescue in the former Ambulance areas. Most Sydney NSWFB rescue stations had two trucks. A heavy-rescue and a combination pumper-rescue. Both vehicles already carried a full primary rescue equipment kit and qualified rescue operators.

This is how the fire brigade were able to assume the rescue role so quickly:

Short term:

• Transfer the heavy-rescue and it's staff to an existing fire station within the former Ambulance rescue area. This can (literally) be achieved 15 minutes notice, considerably less than the several days notice that was given.
• Begin training of existing staff at the fire station and/or transfer existing rescue operators to the station.
• Once training is complete, install some specialised rescue equipment onto the station's existing pumper, turning it into a rescue-pumper.

Medium Term:

• The heavy-rescue will probably remain for some time after the training is complete, responding to calls alongside the rescue-pumper to provide additional manpower and expertise.

Long Term:

• Each rescue station will now be equipped with a rescue-pumper, with qualified operators and state-of-the-art equipment. The fleet of heavy-rescue vehicles will be strategically re-distributed across the metropolitan area.

• General comments on the content of the page:

It's unclear if the objective of the page is to claim that the NSWFB's funding should change to be primarily government funded, or that the Ambulance funding should change to be similar to the fire brigade model. Either way, it has absolutely nothing to do with the provision of rescue services.

As is commonly the case with the Save Our Rescue site, this page uses selective figures to paint a picture that represents the wishes of the authors. This sort of deception does nothing to help their cause, and only reduces further their credibility.