Im trying hard take some of the comments here in the light hearted context in which I hope they were intended, re healthcare fire safety advisors and NAHFO, despite the patronising tone some of them convey.
Perhaps, like myself, most healthcare advisors are simply too busy doing their job every day to spend hours arguing flippantly over esoteric trivia.
NAHFO is progressing, nowhere more so than in Scotland where huge steps forward have been taken in the last four years. progress is superficially slow and little often appears to be happening. But we operate in the context of a huge public service. A supertanker needs a lot of searoom and a turn can be observed for hours - neither can you eat a whole elephant in one sitting.
I am actively involved in much of what is going on in Scotland and can aver that NAHFO is at the heart of it. We are the lead body on the Property and Environment Forum fire group, holding the chair and having three other members. This group commissions and administers Firecode revision in Scotland and co-operates and consults closely with English colleagues on issues of common interest. We have also played an important part in the formulation of the new Scottish Executive Health Dept. policy guidance to health authorities, about to be issued, amongst a range of other involvements. This important group would not exist but for the lobbying from NAHFO members who were instrumental in having the group set up by the PEF, who were gracious enough to make us the lead body and offer the chair to us, without prompting. A measure perhaps of their recognition of our professional approach and competency to hold the position and take the lead on fire safety matters.
But the work is laborious and drawn out - there is no other way and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous and shows a lack of knowledge of the thorough and difficult minefield of development work needed to make guidance accurate and appropriate. We are also significant national training providers to the SNHS having provided a number of national courses on fire safety management, with more currently in the pipeline. The SNHS health authorities have no problem or question over our competency as trainers for their 'responsible peson' managers.
Colleagues involved in these processes in England are confronted with equally difficult problems, not least of which is the current healthcare RRO guidance. Their work is hampered by impositions over which they have little control (the guidance must conform to a pre-ordained template) and what ultimately results may not be to everyone's liking. But you can be assured that those who produce the guidance, do so conscientiously and professionally, and they are making great efforts to ensure that the guidance is in the interests of the NHS and the fire advisors who will use it.
I take particular exception to sarcastic, yes and even malicious suggestions that NAHFO itself or it's members are less than professional or competent when it is clear that this is simply untrue. Such comments are an insult, subversive and reflect poorly on those who resort to such means. Is the measure of our activity or success to be simply how loudly we trumpet from the treetops? If there is to be debate make it worth reading and let's have less of the innuendo and criticism of those who work tirelessly for better standards. Let's raise the debating bar a bit.
