There are more fires per person in districts with a high percent of people on a benefit. Percent people on a benefit is highly correlated with percent unemployed. However, percent people on a benefit, gave a much better fit. The relation with average income was strange and seemed in conflict with the relation with percent people on a benefit. Further analysis shows that the high income fires tend to be equipment caused fires so it makes some sense - richer people have more equipment.
Occupancy is hard to interpret.
Higher occupancy is associated with younger populations, more children, lower incomes, possibly newer suburbs. It is impossible to dissociate these effects. We are using population as the primary predictor of the number of fires. This will automatically lead to higher people per dwelling being associated with lower fires per person. I also repeated the analyses when one looked at only certain kinds of fires.