It seems that Nanny's attitude to "risk" and health and safety may have cost someone their life, or at the very least distressed the dead man's family.
An inquest has heard the tragic story of what happened in the last hours of Karl Malton's life.
In May last year Mr Malton was hit by a car as he walked along an unlit country road, near his home in Crowland. He fell down a 15 ft bank into a ditch filled with 18 inches of water.
Police (ten of them), firemen (a fire engine load) and paramedics (an ambulance load), having all carried out risk assessments, were ordered by their respective bosses not to climb down the bank to help him (it was unclear as to whether he was already dead or not).
Instead a decision was made to send for a "water rescue team", based more than 50 miles away. Mr Malton's body lay in the ditch for 3 hours, whilst the rescue teams (waiting for water rescue) sat around and drank tea.
The inquest heard that officers no longer have to swim or receive life-saving training.
It has come to this!
When are the British public going to rebel against Nanny and her health and safety legislation, and reclaim their lives?
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
This is a shameful episode.....Will firecrews be unable to go into a burning building because it is too dangerous....That must be the logical conclusion if grown men or women cannot go down a bank to check if someone is dead or not......Surely a rope around the waist and a few burly firemen holding the other end would not have been too risky.....If the fire crew think it is, then perhaps they're in the wrong job!!
ReplyDeleteSadly this is not the first such incident of this type, I recall reports of two plastic policemen letting a toddler drown because they weren't trained to enter a few inches of water...Shameful.
As I said in a private Email to Ken, I suspect the senior manager told the fire crew that if they attempted the rescue they would not be insured....This is a coverall that many companies and public sector organisations use to get staff to comply with silly diktats......Perhaps the appearance of so many conditional fee lawyers has contributed to the ridiculous situation we now find ourselves in, I don't know, but one thing for sure, something needs to be done to bring commonsense back again and to clip the wings of idiotic 'elf'n'safety regulations and the morons that interpret them the way they do.....Rant over !!!
Maybe now all of those bloody annoying police-based excuses for televisual entertainment will have to be re-scripted?
ReplyDeleteNo more hurtling around in nasty dangerous cars at twenty or even - gasp - thirty miles an hour. No more investigating or pursuing nasty dangerous criminal types...
... actually, as I typed that last line a huge 1,000 watt lightbulb went on over my head. Of course! That's why H.M. Constabulary et al are only pursuing cases such as supermarket trolley mis-parking or dog-walking without proper qualifications and suchlike now! Everything else the police used to do such as actually being the proverbial thin blue line is now too dangerous.
It's already happened, the change-over is complete!
Agreed, and the vast majority of sheep in this poxy country don't give a toss.
ReplyDeleteIf it can be proved the man drowned because of the emergency services' failure to act then those responsible for issuing the order not to enter the ditch, deserve to be charged with manslaughter.
ReplyDeleteBastards.
Tonk. said...
ReplyDelete"This is a shameful episode..."
Too right it is!
Tonk also said: "As I said in a private Email to Ken, I suspect the senior manager told the fire crew that if they attempted the rescue they would not be insured....This is a coverall that many companies and public sector organisations use to get staff to comply with silly diktats....."
Backed up by disciplinary action if anyone dares to do the 'decent' thing.
Disgusted, Tunbridge Wells said...
"If it can be proved the man drowned because of the emergency services' failure to act then those responsible for issuing the order not to enter the ditch, deserve to be charged with manslaughter.
Bastards."
Too right they should: but these kind of tossers are not above lying their way out of any whitewash, er, sorry, enquiry. I wonder if they would have taken the same approach if it had been a member of THEIR family in the ditch, or a so-called VIP? Like hell they would!
I don't think it is acceptable to order some into a situation where they may be injured or killed.
ReplyDeleteBut that does not mean people should shed their humanity & say "I'm doing nothing - rules y'know!".
The continued hiding behind "the rules" instead of applying common sense & humanity is what has caused this.
Just like the 2 PCSOs that watched a kid drown because they were told they didn't have to jump into the water.
Just like the police, social workers etc that stood by (and helped) a child be taken into care solely because a man had illegally (and unwittingly) docked the tails of dogs.
At which point did the police & other public sector workers shed their humanity?
No-one respects them now. But they are OK about it because they get to bully people & that makes them feel good...
Proud to be British?
Am I fuck.
Anonymous 'I don't think it is acceptable to order some into a situation where they may be injured or killed.'
ReplyDeleteOur politicians have been doing that to our military for nearly 10 years now, all on the pretext that these wars are protecting us back home here.
We know that is a lie, the military know it too, but they continue to do as instructed.
I can tell you if a soldier had passed by during this tragedy, he would not have hesitated to try to get the man out.
Perhaps, if the Fire Service, Ambulance Service and Police want to change their role to a safer one where they only help in risk-minimised situations then they should lose that special official and unofficial social status as part of "The Services"?
ReplyDeleteThat leaves us with just the Coastguard/RNLI and the properly and correctly (if very poorly) Armed Services: Army; Navy; RAF.
From the sound of this and other similar incidents the Police et al are now "mere" Office Workers in uniform who go out a lot.
Nanny's minions now have another 'law' to hide behind from our surpreme leaders in the EU in the shape of the working hours directive. Sorry, luv would like to help out, but my shifts over more than my jobs worth to save someones life and break an EU law.
ReplyDeleteWhat a fucking mess this country has become. Sorry for the language but I am so angry at the moment.
The principle behind the working hours directive is good because, in my opinion, nobody should be compelled or pressurised to work excessive hours: indeed, that was one of the main raison d'etre for the formation of trade unions and the labour party. If society cannot function without the necessity of excessive hours, it would seem to suggest that certain workers are being exploited. (I wonder how many gaffers work these long hours?) However, I very much agree with your point, that human life must always overide any EU directive or 'elf'n'safety dictat.
ReplyDeleteIt is, of course, true that someone can drown in an inch or two of water. It needs only for the airways to be blocked. (Sorry, but I'm an education presenter for the RNLI.)
ReplyDeleteBut although the person was drowning, surely the rescuers did not need to "swim" in the alleged 18 inches of water. More of a paddle,I should think. That being so, why did the fact that the crews are not taught to swim enter into the equation?
I'm sure the insurance point is absolutely right!