Debate in Scottish parliament regarding TPC of fire risk assessors

[colin todd]

Hopefully a more rational debate than can be found here recently.  The debate is scheduled for next Wednesday evening, and will no doubt be reported in the media thereafter.  The important point relates to the need for fire risk assessors to be qualified, preferably by TPC.

Herewith the full motion:

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx?SearchType=Simple&Keyword=rosepark&ExactPhrase=True&DateChoice=0&SortBy=DateSubmitted&ResultsPerPage=10

[William 29]

Amen

[colin todd]

That's very monosyllabic, Wullie?

[kurnal]

 The proposal appears to refer to personal competence and certification rather than company certification. 

[colin todd]

I think its not that specific Big Al.

[William 29]

That's very monosyllabic, Wullie?

I would have replied but I don't know what that means??

[colin todd]

It means, Wullie, that your cryptic reply was only one word long albeit that it was not truly monosyllabic (comprising just one syllable) but bisyllabic--AE   MEN.

I was not sure what it meant, though I am aware that Amen means so be it.  In the absence of grown up discussion about TPC in other threads, and as one of the good guys in the profession, as evidenced by your certification to SP 205, I wondered if you would care to amplify.  (You probably meant in that one little word, something like typical of Scotland to lead the way for their less fortunate neighbours, and I hope that the motion, which already has cross party support,  leads to change in Scotland but I may be reading too much into your comment.

[kurnal]

Sorry to spoil the illusion Colin but its Northern Ireland who are already ahead of Scotland on this one.

The motion, as presented in the link you provided, simply says that PEOPLE  (Note NOT companies) offering services in fire risk assessment should be properly qualified, preferably by third party certification. 
This to me suggests that they are looking towards personal rather than company TPC. And its clearly the people walking the floor who should be competent and company schemes such as SP205 are a little wishy washy in that regard, especially for large companies with a large number of assessors based in wide geographical regions.   I agree its too early for detailed analysis of the Scottish motion  but I suggest if anything  they are likely to follow the NI model?

[colin todd]

Big Al, you are reading too much into person in this context.  A company is a person in law. I think the MSP will probably embrace both TPC of companies and persons in his speech.  You should also note that in NI the need for competence is restricted to the care sector and even then there is an expressed preference on the part of my good friends in the RQIA for companies that are TPC.

[William 29]

It means, Wullie, that your cryptic reply was only one word long albeit that it was not truly monosyllabic (comprising just one syllable) but bisyllabic--AE   MEN.

I was not sure what it meant, though I am aware that Amen means so be it.  In the absence of grown up discussion about TPC in other threads, and as one of the good guys in the profession, as evidenced by your certification to SP 205, I wondered if you would care to amplify.  (You probably meant in that one little word, something like typical of Scotland to lead the way for their less fortunate neighbours, and I hope that the motion, which already has cross party support,  leads to change in Scotland but I may be reading too much into your comment.

Thank you, I think that sums it up very well and was exactly what I was going to write but thought Amen would be more concise due to time constraints tendering for work we have gained by maintaining our TPC. 

[GB]

Any move to increase the credibility, validity and competence of the FRA profession is one that should be applauded and supported.

I am cynical however as to the motive of such a motion - is it to increase these values within Scotland or to simply benefit a handful of organisations local to the MSP who has been lobbied by individuals who seek to gain a financial advantage?

If the 3rd Party schemes were less bureaucratic and cumbersome, then perhaps there would be a larger uptake of the said schemes however for any small business potentially consisting of 1 or 2 individuals, the time and cost required to apply, join and remain a member of these schemes is prohibitive and exclusive to larger companies with more resources.

Surely a more robust CPD scheme within Scotland with an emphasis on development and education would serve the industry better by encouraging those on the fringes to increase their individual competency.

We are 3rd Party certificated for a part of our business which to be honest isn't worth the paper its written on! It is only our own strive to improve that keeps us on the right tracks and recruit and retain clients.

[wee brian]

Amen to that

[nearlythere]

Big Al, you are reading too much into person in this context.  A company is a person in law. I think the MSP will probably embrace both TPC of companies and persons in his speech.  You should also note that in NI the need for competence is restricted to the care sector and even then there is an expressed preference on the part of my good friends in the RQIA for companies that are TPC.

I hope your good friends are not cherry picking Dot.
I refer to your response to my concerns on the wording of the RQIA letter  last year when I posted:-

"So from further examination of the letter it would seem that if I go for accreditation to carry on my work at residential homes it could well be a waste of time and money as RQIA is advising home owners to "preferably" use companies to carry out or review their FRAs.

As will the word "recommendation" in the letter be enforced so will the word "preferably".


Your reply was:- "Nearly, if you are carrying out FRAs on a commercial basis you are a company. If your company is certificated under a scheme such as BAFE SP 205 then you are fine. And the time given by RQIA is to allow them time to comply BUT also for those working in NI to become certificated".

I am certified under a scheme such as BAFE SP205 or is 205 the only acceptable registration scheme now?

I can also advise that I have heard from a reliable source, which I trust, is that RQIA have accepted FRAs undertaken by Care Home owners and, as far as I'm aware, non are registered.

[colin todd]

GB, your suggestion that the MSP is fostering the commercial interests of TPC fire risk assessors is to say the least distasteful.  Clearly, you confuse Holyrood with Westminster. His concern is for the 14 of his constituents who died in the worst fire disaster since the Kings Cross disaster in 1987, some or all of whom would have lived had the fire risk assessment for Rosepark (carried out by Mr James Reid) been suitable and sufficient, nor might the fire have even occurred.

For avoidance of doubt:

James Reid was a self-employed business consultant, who provided advice in employment law and health and safety. Between 1995 and 2003 the division of work between employment law and health and safety was about 60/40. The health and safety work which he undertook covered a wide range of health and safety matters.

Before becoming self-employed in 1995, Mr Reid had been employed for a number of years in managerial positions, firstly in Scottish Bus Group and then with Insurance Courier Services.

 Mr Reid held a NEBOSH General Certificate in Occupational Safety and Health, acquired following a course of study at Stevenson College. He was a Technician Member (formerly Associate Member) of the Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The basic requirement for that Membership was to hold the NEBOSH General Certificate. As a member of the Territorial Army, he had attended a HM Forces Unit NCO Fire Course in 1998. In September 1999, he had undertaken a one day fire safety audit and fire risk assessment course. He held no specialist qualification in fire risk assessment.

Mr Reid acknowledged that the assessment (for Rosepark care Home) did not address the risk to residents of the Home.

TPC is a no brainer.  

[colin todd]

Almost here,  BAFE SP 205 happens to be the largest TPC scheme for fire risk assessment companies, and is operated by 3 CBs, but there are two other schemes as I am sure you are aware. Since all are UKAS accredited, they make the grade as far as the RQIA letter (for which that awfully nice Kelsall thought I was largely responsible because of the God-like power he attributes to me) is concerned.  Which scheme has certificated you and do you want to buy me a drink in NI in a couple of weeks time?