I wrote last week about SEBEV’s past experience working in flooded areas. This was not something SEBEV had been set up specifically to help with, it was just a natural extension of their willingness to help a community in need.
With flooding and its terrible aftermath seemingly becoming more common, it was inevitable that a SAR group would be set up to assist in this work.
The Inland Flood Rescue Association, which was established in 2008, aims to become the representative voice of swift water and flood rescue teams from across the United Kingdom.
Our objectives are:-
To maintain and enhance our relationship with government and other bodies to the benefit of member water rescue teams within the UK.
To obtain a seat on UK SAR to represent water rescue teams within the UK.
To provide support for developing water rescue teams within the voluntary sector and give advice and guidance on providing a professional accredited rescue service.
To co-ordinate and provide information on specialist approved teams available to the emergency services within the UK.
To provide advice and assistance to its members on matters of insurance, qualifications and current legislation.
To develop and improve methods of water rescue.
To test, evaluate, and endorse/ report on new equipment for IFRA members.
To provide technical information on all aspects of water rescue for IFRA members.
To share information, training and provide support to IFRA teams as required.
To enable IFRA teams to obtain equipment and insurance at discounted rates.
To apply for grants, support and equipment for the mutual benefit of IFRA members.
I don’t know much about the group, or any of its member teams – although over the next few days I will be introducing you to a few of them – but I do like the order of the objectives above…
How much of its aims are to do with looking after its own? Getting its voice heard? etc.. and how few are about providing a good quality inland flood rescue service to the UK? Or am I being over sensitive?
hi Robert heres some info on IFRA as I am the national secretary.
we formed in 08 as you have said due to ill equiped and un qualified well meaning teams turning up to help at the flooding incidents.
we currently have 11 specialist search and rescue teams covering scotland, wales and england.
our teams are recognised as part of the national flood rescue enhancement project through DEFRA.
we have also recently undertook training with RAF SAR at valley and are recognised by them as an accredited association.
we are team typed to the same profesional standards as the fire service and other responders to flood and water related incidents.
we presently have approximatly 250 trained, insured and equipped search and rescue operatives as well as 15 graded search dogs for water, usar and cadaver work.
our teams although indipendent charities/groups operate to national standards and qualifications/training. the basic core elements are Search,Casualty Care,Rope access and rescue and swiftwater and flood response.
our training for example in search covers both land and water to the same standards as the acpo guidance and also MRC courses.
we are in the process of finalising a national training program covering the above core areas.
many of our members are specialist members of mountain rescue teams or the emergency services – HART/USAR/Air Ambulance
we operate a wide variety of equipment ranging from hovercraft through to haggulund tracked vehicles and personal water craft.
our last operational use was at the flooding in cumbria, 2 teams activated, 1 used, bay sar (cumbria fire and rescue’s specialist rescue team)Global water dogs stood by to look for missing police officer.
3 teams on stand by- STAR,CDS and CAVRA with boats and specialist equipment.
if I may answer your questions robert
1.looking after our own? we are here to save lives in the same way ALSAR MRC and any other organisation is.
my personal view point is that as an association should we not be promoting best practice/standards equipment and protocols so that every one is safer in these dynamic incidents, if trying to ensure that you you are as safe as humanly possible and everyone who attends an incident does not get hurt, then yes, we do look after our own.
2. how few of our aims are not about providing a quality IFR service- I have to dissagree.
trying to raise standards, unity and cooperation is to provide a quality service- free of charge, enhancing and coordinating what is available and providing a coordinated service is no different than ALSAR,RNLI or MRC
You are more than welcome to disagree Mark, but let’s look at other organisations…
ALSAR, as I know it best;
“The principal aims of the organisation are:
To promote and co-ordinate adequate search and rescue arrangements in the lowland areas of the United Kingdom and its offshore islands.
To assist and advise statutory bodies in lowland search and rescue work.
To promote and encourage discourse and co-operation between any and all search and rescue organisations in the United Kingdom.”
None of these aims speak of “maintaining and enhancing our relationship with government and other bodies to the benefit of member water rescue teams within the UK” or “obtaining a seat on UK SAR” – whatever that actually means; one assumes it means the UK SAR Operators Group on which ALSAR actually does sit, alongside MR E&W and indeed RNLI who I believe would say represent water teams in the UK and have in fact run flood rescue teams since 2000!
As for MR and RNLI, both these organisations have a very long history of helping others in distress and have developed over time with the changing cultures and times.
I’m not saying any of these groups are ideal – I have issues with all three – but they all portray a maturity which the aims of IFRA don’t.
Don’t take this as meaning I don’t respect the work that the individual teams do; I’ve been there, done that, and really have no desire to play in flood water and sewage ever again! I respect the work and professionalism shown by every team typed by DEFRA for this work.
My concern is that the aims of the “national body” do not reflect this professionalism and dedication of its member teams.
Robert,
I think it would be nitpicking if you look at the two sets of objectives (Alsars and IFRA) and call the IFRA association as not being professional. The first two objectives that you have quoted from IFRA do say about maintaining and enhancing our relationship with Government – this is were we get money from to develop our services and to be used in cases like Cumbria, Boscastle, Tewkesbury etc.
It is only the choice of language that differentiates IFRA objectives to Alsar. Also the first two objectives are the ones that you have contention with. You are quoted as saying
“and how few are about providing a good quality inland flood rescue service to the UK? Or am I being over sensitive?”
I would point out the nine other objectives that you have listed in your first blog deal with this.
It is well known that Britain does not have a “quality” flood response and we are using other services pro tem to fill this gap. Obviously someone had to take charge and put all of the teams into some useful context. Hopefully at some point in the near future this service will rank on the same level as rescue provision now.
Where you say in your second blog, that IFRA are not protraying a level of maturity in their aims – they have been going since 2008. How long have MR and RNLI been going ?
Brian,
I have looked back over my comments and never once have I said that the IFRA is “not being professional”. In fact I emphasise the professionalism of its teams and their members. What I state is that the objectives of the group do not reflect this professionalism.
This might now be nitpicking but the two things are very, very different.
However, I am concerned by any individual or group that believes “obviously someone had to take charge and put all of the teams into some useful context” – this only reinforces my concern about the aims of the IFRA!
As for the aims themselves, I asked “how much of its aims are to do with looking after its own?” As well as the two already highlighted we have;
To provide advice and assistance to its members on matters of insurance, qualifications and current legislation.
To test, evaluate, and endorse/ report on new equipment for IFRA members.
To provide technical information on all aspects of water rescue for IFRA members.
To share information, training and provide support to IFRA teams as required.
To enable IFRA teams to obtain equipment and insurance at discounted rates.
To apply for grants, support and equipment for the mutual benefit of IFRA members.
All of the above aims are for IFRA MEMBERS (!) – not for the good of flood rescue in the UK. My maths isn’t great but isn’t that eight out of the nine aims?
Robert,
To quote your statement : “My concern is that the aims of the “national body” do not reflect this professionalism and dedication of its member teams.” – therefore IFRA is not professional in it’s aims, but it’s member teams are. These aren’t too different – just the choice of words.
The following objectives :
To provide support for developing water rescue teams within the voluntary sector and give advice and guidance on providing a professional accredited rescue service.
To co-ordinate and provide information on specialist approved teams available to the emergency services within the UK.
To develop and improve methods of water rescue.
Deal with supporting the member teams. That would make nine objectives with the first two (already highlighted) making eleven.
Admittedly I got the government funding idea wrong. If IFRA pull all teams together and support them in being used correctly in times of need – what is wrong with that ? What would be wrong in offering other services to the member teams at the same time ?