DETERMINATIONS BY SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER FIRE SAFETY ORDER

[colin todd]

Following on from the Determination thread, and the shock revelations from demontim (to whom we are grateful for release of the confidential information), which I reproduce below, I was wondering what people think of the  determination process under the FSO in England and Wales.Point 30 of the determination

 "It is therefore my view that the choice of heat detector over smoke detectors in this particular case has been carried out in accordance with avaliable guidance related to the particular hotel. In conforming to the British Standard, the responsible person has evaluated the risk in the hotel and concluded that the provision of heat detectors is as low as reasonably practical and that the risk presented in the hotel are those envisaged in these documents.

rightly makes reference to available guidance.

However, during informal discussions with CLG post determination there was a suggestion that the available guidance may need to be revisited in order to address this specific issue. It was also made clear that in hindsight the matter should not have gone to determination but should have been dealt with by the courts.[/b]
End of Quote from post by Demontim.

Please vote in the poll.

[wee brian]

Not sure I'd agree with any of the options. Option 1 would be OK if you left out the bit about trusting Civil Servants. Its a pretty fair system and you dont have to use it if you don't want to.

[CivvyFSO]

I also agree that it is a fair system, and I think the 'heat detectors' determination showed just that. Although they must have been aware that there was no way they could have sided with the FRS involved. I have seen a fair few determinations now, and the technical knowledge surrounding some of them seems quite in-depth, with a well justified decision at the end of it.

[colin todd]

Wee B, For avoidance of doubt, we were not talking about building regs determinations, over which there is no doubt about fairness, transparency, etc.

Civvy, I do not see how you can have seen a fair few since there have only ever been two.

[Midland Retty]

If there have only ever been two determinations thus far, and one we know about of has ruled in favour of the RP not the enforcing authority... then hmmm...

[Meerkat]

It's 1-1 so far isn't it MR?

Colin - I am more or less ignorant of the workings of CLG (lucky me!) so should we surprised that there have only been two determinations or is that in itself an indication that neither "side" has much faith in the process?

[Midland Retty]

It's 1-1 so far isn't it MR?

Thats what I said Meerkat !!!

[CivvyFSO]

Wee B, For avoidance of doubt, we were not talking about building regs determinations, over which there is no doubt about fairness, transparency, etc.

Civvy, I do not see how you can have seen a fair few since there have only ever been two.

I was classing buidling regs determinations as pretty much the same thing. It shows a fair approach.

[colin todd]

No, Civils old chap, you cannot really treat them the same.  I sometimes disagree with determinations under building regs, but I never ever doubt the fairness of the process.

Meery: People used to say that everyone was happy with the FP Act because appeals against 5(4) notices were rare, but the truth is people could not be bothered to go through the cost etc of appealing and thought that the mags would just agree with the firemen anyway.  You could argue the lack of use of determinations many ways, but amongst the many constraining factors is the fact that you need to accept that there has been a breach before you use the process.  People do not normally disagree with the enforcers over just the technical means for rectifying a breach. They generally dispute that a breach has occurred, which leaves them in england with only the courts to turn to (different in Scotland).

[colin todd]

Do remember to read the shock revelations by demontim before voting!  For reference see: http://fire.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=4994.0

I think it is likely that the "informal discussions" to which he refers was a quasi public conference, at which, after the non -fire brigade people were asked to leave, all the fire brigade chaps were told all about how things were to progress so to speak. All good transparent stuff that follows the principles of open government. I must learn the handshake that opens it though. Does anyone know the number for the Better Regulation Executive. I am sure they would be interested to chat to Demon about what he knows.