Is it true that BW demand risk assessments/insurance for the holes dug for
new mile markers (which are only there for a few minutes, as it were). Or is
this, like the famous Maesbury road bridge of around 1996, just a bit of canal
mythology?
David Cragg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Steve wrote:
> > Doesn't this nonsense highlight what a sad state this country's in?=20
> Soon
> > you'll be having to take insurance out to have a picnic in the park.
> Yep agreed wholeheartedly. But don't forget that you won't get your=20
> picnic insurance until you have submitted your risk assessment!!! ;-))
Smiley noted, but that's not too far from the truth these days.
We're used to the idea of someone (usually the local canal society but
sometimes it can involve WRG) having to do a formal Risk Assessment for canal
restoration work sites where I work as a WRG volunteer. But it took me aback
slightly a couple of years ago the first time the caretaker for a village hall
that we were sleeping in presented us with a Risk Assessment for our
accommodation.
A little while ago I was talking with a BW person about a problem experienced
by a member of this list who had been told that photography at a particular
canal site was prohibited. We got onto the subject of what if any permissions
etc should be sought before taking photographs on BW sites for possible future
publication. She mentioned Risk Assessments, at which point we both realised
the way the conversation was going and changed the subject...
Martin
---------------------------------
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel
bargains.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
