Safety Matters

[Graham Breeze]

Having worked in the field of safety management for several years all I would like to say is that the content and thrust of AI's arguments are correct. I cannot for the life of me understand why people don't get it.
Is that short enough for the nit pickers?

Fudge

The FRA Safety Requirements (page 9) say:

1.1 The Competitor must accept primary responsibity for his/her own safety.

My FRA Committee colleagues and I heard what the Coroner said in addressing the Court at the conclusion of the Belfield Inquest. We were listening hard because a runner had died in a fell race on our "watch"- for us it wasn't a matter of Forum debate.

The Coroner had studied in detail the FRA Safety Requirements, line by line. He clearly did not think these diluted the fundamental issue (1.1) and in support of that view he refused to endorse eight (8) additional safety requirements sought by the Belfield family.

The Coroner further publicly indicated his recognition that the FRA was a responsible body which had the best interests of fell runners at its core in the context of the actions it had taken following the comments his colleague had made following the death of Judith Taylor.

As I say, there were others from the FRA Committee present during the Inquest like the Chair, Madeleine Watson, the FRA ex-Secretary Alan Brentnall, and Jon Broxap; all of whom are members of the FRA Safety Committee (and other Committee Members such as Scoffer) which, as I have previously posted, is currently looking at the "safety" documentation and considering new elements such as formal management plans.

If you wish to be consulted on any redrafts you are free to send me a PM.

Regards,

Graham.