http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104358/Charity-shop-worker-drowned-shallow-lake-emergency-services-refused-wade-rescue-health-safety-rules.html



No coroners verdict or more importantly summary (the verdict will no doubt be misadventure) as yet but again it looks like the emergency services have not covered themselves in glory......

Maybe they should have called the R.N.L.I. they never refuse a call for help, whatever the circumstances, often to the point of endangering their own lives, not a jobswoth amongst them.

_________________
Its not always the biggest and the bestest, its them that make the least mistakes.

No bystanders willing to get their feet wet ?
Shame on the onlookers as the fire department were not even needed, just an ambulance and paramedics.

should be involuntary manslaughter

_________________
Its not always the biggest and the bestest, its them that make the least mistakes.

Shame on absolutely everyone involved. When 'health and safety' starts costing lives you know it's all gone wrong.

I have always donated to the RNLI and always will, and this is one of the reasons. They are unpaid volunteers willing to put their own lives at risk time after time, and never a refusal, despite the many lives they have lost to rescue others.

The response of the 'official emergency services' in this, and other cases defies belief. They should hang their heads in shame.

Totally agree with all of that Moley.

As some of you may be aware, I served for 30+ years in the fire brigade so have a special interest in this story.

Firstly, as the source is the gutter press, it's important to doubt much of the reporting, but there seems to be little doubt that crews were not committed. I am afraid this is another example of where a combination of the application of 'elf & safety', plus a move away from a disciplined uniform service has resulted in a wrong decision being made. Officers are now managers and the whole job is run on a business like model

When I was squirting wet stuff at the hot stuff, we were not allowed to consider anyone was dead, even if they were in pieces along 200 yards of the A40. The rationale was that as non doctors, we weren't competent to do so. Although that rule is still in place, it is now acceptable to carry out a dynamic risk assessment and if the Incident Manager decides that a victim is not likely to live, then no crews will be committed. So let me repeat that 21st century approach to rescues:
A body crushed under a tipper truck and now sadly in 32 bits over two counties = fire service cant say he's dead.
A body floating in a lake some distance from the shore, where no actual hands on assessment of the casualty is possible = It's OK to assume he is dead.

The actual putting out fires part of the job is going the same way. During a very recent local house fire, a decision was taken that no persons were reported as trapped, so crews will stand outside putting water through the windows. Firefighters on the incident pleaded to 'offensively' tackle the fire from inside with breathing apparatus, but were held back as it was determined by the suits as too dangerous. The result was three houses were severely damaged, where an internal attack would have saved two of the three.

I could write pages of this disappointing new age which is devaluing the fire service - but thankfully I wont!. I'll finish by saying that it's only going to get worse. In the near future, there will be a court case (or cases) after senior fire service staff ordered crews inside a large vegetable packing plant during a fire. Four fire-fighters didn't come out. The ramifications after the court case - especially if any firefighter/manager is imprisoned, will be massive. The amount of 'safe' decisions will rocket and stories like this lake incident will be a regular event. Breathing apparatus will not be used when no life risk is involved and our insurance premiums will increase until the average punter can't afford them.

As I was leaving the job, I noticed a new breed of officer - sorry, manager. They seem to have a common cowardly ideology: "If I don't make a decision I wont make a mistake, and if I don't make a mistake, I'll keep my job". This is the future of our 999 services, but don't blame those at the coalface, blame their leaders

Thanks for that SOT, though the source wasn't the gutter press, it was the Daily Mail. The only national newspaper I'd actually refer to as 'gutter press' would be the Daily Star, not because of its journalistic standards but its rubbish content.

Thanks for the honest appraisal SOT.

I recall the incident you refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Atherstone_on_Stour_fire. Clearly in situations like this the emergency services command is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Health and Safety law is not supposed to impede the emergency services in the course of their work where that work is the protection (or rescue) of life. This says to me the legislation is flawed (or more to the point law created by High Court Cases) and that Government should be doing something about it. The law needs to recognise that there is a need for dynamic risk assessment and the fact lives may need to be saved on arrival at an incident and not be ready to penalise individuals on the very rare occasions they get it wrong.

I am sure the fire fighters at this incident are as pi$$ed off with their management as we are applying the H&S rules associated with an incident such the major fire at Atherstone (and persons reported) as to someone drowning in 3 feet of water in the local park. Clearly there is a massive difference and these people are paid large sums of money to be able to differentiate it!!

It's also a damn shame one or two of the firefighters could not take the initiative and save this chaps life irrespective of the rules, in the knowledge they were right to do so and with the full backing of the public and their Trade Union. Maybe that would have taken several large steps to rid us of this nonsense.