FireNet Community
THE REGULATORY REFORM (FIRE SAFETY) ORDER 2005 => Q & A => Topic started by: wee brian on June 20, 2004, 09:05:29 AM
-
If your interested the, unconfimed transcript of evidence taken by the Regulatory Reform Scrutiny Committee is on the web at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmdereg.htm
when the page comes up click on uncorrected evidence...
I thought Glyn Evans did well.
-
Is that or is it not yet more daft twaddle from the ODPM-the draft order I mean. From the people who broght you the crap workplace regs we are pleased to announce the son of crap workplace regs, the even more crap rro. what a let down. best thing that can happen is that the govt falls b4 it all happens
-
That's the problem with you CT, always beating about the bush.
For heavens sake, why don't you just get off the fence and say what you think for once!!!
-
Colin, what problems do you have with the RRO- if you did why didn't you contact the committee? Oh well too late.
-
I would think most people's worries are that if it happens in a similar way to the FP (W) Regs then half the workplaces won't have heard of it, half that do won't bother to comply, the other half will produce a paragraph or table row in the middle of an H&S risk assessment, others will wave fire procedures and extinguisher service certs in your face as RA's and the every 10 years FPO visit to wander up & down a stair and out again will become an every 20 years sticking their head around the door (don't start me on Mr Todds favourite brigade either who've come up with some classics recently).
This may seem rather cynical, but is based on experience. Normally the private sector get a rosy picture because by the fact they are private means they will only see the premises that wish to comply well .As we are sent into multi occupied properties whether the tenants would want us there or not we see a truer picture
-
They could not even be bothered to write it in English that the poor old employers will understand. The overpaid people who wrote it have virtually taken the WFPL and extended it to protect everyone as opposed to simply employees. More work for consultants I guess, but that is not what HMG promised.
-
Monty, Better not beating around the bush than doing what the hierarchy of the British Fire Service are doing, which is pretending that the Emperor IS wearing clothes, lest they be thought to be not trendy enough to warrant a £100,000 a year plus salary.
-
Just in case you are interested the second set of notes for the Committee from 29 June 2004 is now on the web.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmdereg.htm
This time you get to hear from the Minister himself. (scoll down to uncorected evidence)
-
Thanks for that Wee B. A lot of common sense spoken, apart from the crap about it reducing the number of deaths from fire.
-
The chap called Taig talked a lot of sense, mindless aims to reduce risks are worthless without some benchmark, (whoops there I go again, falling into government speak), to assess against.
He was also clear that enforcement was necessary. Too many CFO's are seeing this as a way of reducing legislative fire safety resources.
Andy Jack wasn't bad but then he has lived and breathed this Order for eighteen months.
Phil Hope was useless...but then he is only another minister on the way through.
-
Thats a fair summary, Jimmy