You have to wonder whether FRUs are really a good idea at all. An ambulance service manager, with (in my very rough estimation) the same amount of money could provide one fully equipped ambulance (with a staff of two) or one single-staffed FRU car. So in theory, by providing FRUs, there are twice as many vehicles available to respond to calls. But...since an FRU can't transport anyone...unless the FRU gets there in time to decide that the patient doesn't need to go to hospital and stand down the ambulance, in fact three staff (and two vehicles) are needed to respond to a single call. One of these staff could be tied up on scene for a very long time doing very little apart from waiting for the ambulance to arrive. How is that time (or money life) saving? If for every two FRUs there was instead one ambulance, there would be less staff time spent waiting, and the ambulace crew could transport the patient right away. Of course there would be less vehicles in total to respond to calls, but wouldn't the average amount of staff time taken per call be reduced (therefore increasing throughput)? I understand that really what's needed is a lot more ambulances, less FRUs and other schemes which are really only geared towards government targets, and educating the public about when and when not to call an ambulance. A bit of basic first aid training for the masses wouldn't go amiss either...