Who wrote the guides

[rn976]

For info

http://www.info4fire.com/news-content/full/exclusive-enforcement-notice-details-wide-ranging-fire-safety-breaches-at-clg-headquarters

it get better as you read this

regards rn976

[AnthonyB]

An interesting point is "Other deficiencies found include an “unacceptable” policy that no one should use portable fire extinguishers in the building;"

Quite a few companies use this policy to remove the need for staff extinguisher training and in attempts to not have extinguishers at all - does this make them in the wrong (it's a shame it can't become case law as the DCLG can only get a censure for non compliance)

[assessor]

"Do as I say not as I do"

[Meerkat]

This was the bit that I found most depressing

"an inspector from the enforcing authority, the Crown Premises Inspection Group, states:
“The concepts of ‘responsible’ and ‘competent’ persons, and the duties placed upon those persons under the Order, appear not to be understood within CLG premises”."

That'll explain why we've had so much discussion on it here then....  The people that wrote it don't know what it meant in the first place!   

[Clevelandfire 3]

Oh this is brilliant. You couldnt make it up. And they wonder why this country is in a mess. Its time to bin the CLG theyre nothing but embarrasing. They are yet another wasteful bunch of idiots who have not got a clue. Not suprising they were created by Tony Blair. Absolutely priceless.

[BLEVE]

Definately ironic but not in the least bit surprising, no doubt they used their own guidance notes during their initial fire risk assessment

[John Webb]

It's quite likely that those responsible for the buildings did not consult their own experts that were to hand. In my experience of working in the Civil Service for nearly 28 years those responsible for buildings often ignored their own (government) experts and went their own sweet way.......

[Allen Higginson]

One of these days something will truely surprise me in rlation to government.

[afterburner]

Ah John, so you're the one,
the one who worked for the Civil Service.
Outstanding! (Some of our colleagues on the Forum allege that nobody actually works for the Government

[John Webb]

I worked for various governments of various hues over my 28 years in the job. But I always tried to help the public who were paying my wages and who had problems with fire safety. So when my part of the Civil Service was privatised and it was clear that serving the public would be secondary to more commercial matters I was rather happy to take the money and run!

Some of the guides were written by my former colleagues at Fire Research but all suffered heavy editing at the hands of the CLG, I have heard.

[bungle]

The Fire Service , as a whole, not just in terms of fire safety, worked far better when it was part of the home office. The whole thing started to unravel when it was placed in the dustmen/social workers/ school caretakers melting pot and allowed to rot from the head down.
Anyone remember the CFBAC or the HMI?

Bungle

[kurnal]

Or the HOUEM?

[colin todd]

I knew most of the HMIs who dealt with fire safety from the 1970s onwards, and always trusted them implicitly. Although I didnt always agree with them (I included the term "mixed system" in BS 5839-6 because one of them, a lovely and thoroughly decent chap, was forever telling me that you couldnt mix systems), they were always 100% straight down the middle.
Now, if they were involved in determinations, you could have been sure that they would be totally impartial. (A bit like those by the Scottish Government and those under building regs really.)