Its a tangled web we weave.
There are so many different messages coming out of the government, national bodies and other vested interests.
For example the government are very keen not to be seen to be increasing the burden on industry so take a very low key- suggesting that for most, straightforward premises almost any employee with a modicum of sense and knowledge and armed with the guidance can make a suitable and sufficient assessment of risk.
Those who remember the damp squib of the workplace regs launch will probably have seen all the signs before!
But on the other hand they support the view that anybody who provides a risk assessment service should be accredited through an industry scheme (not yet in place). The Industry bodies then get together (BSI, FPA,IFE,) and they pay another vested interest, a practicioner in the field (albeit with a huge reputation and expertise) to devise such systems and standards by which the rest of us - as competitors- will have to conform if we are to join the club. Its potentially all a bit incestuous in my opinion, with no forum for the rest of the industry to have our say.
Are industry based accreditation schemes really comparable with proper quality management schemes such as ISO 9000? Is there any ongoing audit of quality standards- with for example the IFE approved list?
Such systems really push up overheads - I am just looking at the ISO 9000 system and for my fairly small scale business its likely cost is £6k in the first year.
Whats the outcome of this gulf in standards?
The responsible person of the small to medium size business, who is not quite sure and would like some help from a competent person will be put off by the cost of bringing in an accredited consultant and so will wing it and hope not to get caught out. Theres not much point asking the Brigades for advice- the restrucures and modernisation will have them firmly foocussed on the high risk and community work.
The gulf could easily filled by an experienced competent ex FPO who can offer a competent level of service with minimal overheads, and with the experience and true competence of knowing their own limitations. So from my point of view cbfire- you go for it - your country needs you. PAS79 is an excellent foundation from which to work-
but if you have experience you may not learn a lot new from it.
A final point- my reading of the current situation is that the government, not wishing to be seen to be increasing the burden on industry, is very happy for civil law claims and the insurance industry to carry out the role of enforcement. So the RRO will be a non event from its launch, for most premises enforcement will not be visible and the ultimate burden on industry will be all the greater as the insurance companies insist on risk assessments carried out by themselves or their approved agents.
