The government could end the strike threat today by agreeing to meet the firefighters' demand for a 40% pay increase, but it won't do it. Caving in would cost money - which the chancellor, Gordon Brown, would be reluctant to find - even though the price of settling now would be less than the £200m daily cost of the strike if it runs into the winter. Ministers will also be aware that giving in now would only make things worse in the end. Other public sector unions would put in similar pay claims and threaten more strikes, leaving Labour's reputation for prudent economic management in ruins. As a result, the government would rather risk the strikes going ahead than look weak - or give the opposition a chance to revive memories of the days when Labour governments did private deals with union barons over beer and sandwiches at No 10.
Option 2: tough it out
Some New Labour figures are said to have welcomed the prospect of a big national public sector strike, hoping that a government win would boost Tony Blair's reputation as the 1984-85 miners' strike boosted that of Margaret Thatcher. If that was true at the start, it won't be now. The government could hold out until the union's resolve to continue the strike cracks, but the cost of doing so would be huge, politically and economically.
In the short term, however, showing resolve is probably the government's best option. Ministers will aim to paint the government as the moderate party in the dispute, without giving an inch. The aim will be to swing the public mood - at the moment behind the fire strikers - against the Fire Brigades Union. They will start to emphaise the apparent links between the fire union leader, Andy Gilchrist, and hard-left union leaders such as Bob Crow - links which are bound to embarrass the relatively moderate Mr Gilchrist. Today's Times, which says that the prime minister sees the strikes as "new Scargillism" is an example of this sort of black propaganda. Ministers will also emphasise the fire union's intransigence over changing outdated working conditions as part of any pay deal, and they will gently ridicule the union's blatantly extreme 40% claim, pointing out that other key workers, such as cleaners, doctors and nurses, have settled for far less.
Option 3: ban firefighters' strikes
A hardline option would be to declare all-out strikes by fire workers illegal: compelling them to provide at least a skeleton service at all times. After all, the soldiers who will replace fire fighters are banned from striking and - as the government pointed out earlier this week - in 1979 the TUC agreed terms restricting strikes that threaten public safety. But an all-out ban would be a high-risk option that the government is very unlikely to favour. It would destroy Labour's links with the union movement and would be deeply unpopular with Labour MPs. Any ban on strikes would only come after a sustained battle through the winter and when the government was certain that the public mood was on its side.
Option 4: swallow its pride and settle
This is the option ministers will probably choose, as early as next week. The government knows that it will have to increase its initial pay offer, but will seek to tie this to new, flexible working practices and to spread the deal over several years. It is likely that the government will bring forward parts of the independent inquiry into firefighter's pay and conditions, being chaired by Sir George Bain and currently due to report in December. An early report would provide grounds for a settlement and allow both sides to avoid looking like they have lost. The first 48-hour strike, scheduled for October 29, will almost certainly go ahead, but ministers - and firefighters - will be very keen to reach a settlement before bonfire night parties begin on the weekend of November 2.
