Firefighters to protest plans to close eight on-call fire stations
Dorset and Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service is planning to close eight stations across the region to bridge a funding gap
A protest is to take place in Salisbury this morning (10/2) over the proposed closure of eight on-call fire stations in Dorset and Wiltshire.
The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) is staging a rally outside Salisbury City Hall after Dorset and Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service (DWFRS) revealed plans to close multiple on-call stations in an effort to bridge a funding gap.
The FBU warns 100 firefighters will be lost if plans are approved.
The eight stations slated for closure are Charmouth, Cranborne, Hamworthy and Maiden Newton in Dorset, and Bradford on Avon, Mere, Ramsbury and Wilton in Wiltshire.
DWFRS insists it's a step it doesn't want to take, but feels it has no other choice with a deficit of more than a million pounds for the coming year.
The service says it has been warning of fire station closure for years, after a decade of funding cuts from the Government. In November 2025, the National Fire Chiefs Council said it had secured three-year settlements for local services with No. 10, while Government officials also agreed to review the funding formula.
Fire bosses are steadfast in their position that this isn't down to financial mismanagement, simply a lack of funding that can't be solved despite increase the amount we pay through Council Tax by the maximum amount possible.
In a statement last month, Chief Fire Officer Andy Cole said: “As with many public sector organisations, Dorset & Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service (DWFRS) continue to face significant financial challenges, despite our attempts to lobby Government for better funding.
"This financial pressure reflects a long-term reduction in central government funding for fire and rescue services, combined with rising costs that sit largely outside our control, such as the addition of National Insurance and pay award costs, as well as a below national average council tax contribution, we must find ways to address the forecast deficits and ensure we are sustainable in the future."
Later today (10/2), councillors who are on the Fire and Rescue Authority will meet to discuss the proposals and determine whether or not they can proceed to a 13-week public consultation.
Lowest possible increase in risk
DWFRS says it has been working hard to ensure that closures come with the smallest rise in risk to the public, while accepted that any closure can lead to increased response times.
Their work eventually showed them that eight closures was the lowest number of stations that could shut whilst retaining acceptable response times and balancing the budget.
And while the closures would mean it could take emergency services to reach us, on average it would still be within the target of 10 minutes to respond to a fire, and 15 minutes to arrive at the scene of a car crash.
However, the service is positive that the data shows them the proposed closures aren't in areas where demand is high and that nearby stations are also picking up much of the slack already.
This is based on the general availability of on-call firefighters, who work other jobs around their duties as a firefighter. But through using modelling that worked on the assumption that there was full availability at on-call stations, bosses were able to calculate the impact of closing stations, allowing them to ensure that they shut the ones with the lowest increase in risk to the public.
More strain on the system
In response to the planned closures, the FBU has set up a petition calling for public support, which has so far gathered almost 10,000 signatures.
It warns that the loss of 96 firefighters and 14 fire engines puts people in danger and that on-call stations are "essential" for the communities they serve.
In the petition, the FBU says: "Removing these stations will mean slower response times, fewer available crews, and increased pressure on already-stretched neighbouring stations. When a fire engine has to travel further, people wait longer. And when people wait longer, lives are put at risk."
The organisation is calling on councillors to reject the closures, insisting their responsibility is to "protect the public they serve, not to oversee the dismantling of a vital emergency service their communities rely on."