Hopefully so deep that most people won't come across them. You are always going to have some cowboys just as you are always going to have some crime. What we have to do is decide what an acceptable maximum is and work to reduce it to that level. Zero tolerance policies and other ideas or that ilk scare me. They shout extremism which is never good.
When I first heard about Part P I dug out the consultation paper and had a bit of a flick through it. One part sticks in my mind more than any other. Something like ten times more people die from falling off chairs changing light bulbs then do modifying their home electrics. Laugh, I nearly fell off my chair!
Your example is hopelessly wrong, and does not compare to the electrical cnotracting situation very well.
Speeders always use this lame excuse.
Start by reintroducing the basic core concepts that have been lost in recent decades, to the heavy cost of everyone. Personal responsibility, its not hard to teach the concept. Discipline, including self discipline, again its not hard to teach it, its just that people today are so lost about these core concepts.
The childlike expectation that nanny state will give you everything you need and that you dont need to solve problems and make decisions that will seriously affect your life is both widespread and dangerously naive. It is absolutely core that kids learn that nothing is guaranteed, even life itself. Everything you have depends on the decisions you make and the actions you take.
This is a very simple idea, it is not difficult to teach it, and it makes all the difference between a complete t--t and someone that makes good of their life. But idiot parents today would rather not teach these simple life transforming realities to their offspring lest it cause them to worry ocasionally.
The message is simple: nothings guaranteed, your decisions determine what happens in your life, everything costs money, especially the unexpected, and we're here to help or bail you out if ever its needed.
Yes, people are taught a false sense of security today. They want everything to be 'safe' and seem to think it is. But nothing is, not one thing. Every single activity in life leads to injury or death in some cases. Yep, even using a condom. Life is about minimising your risks: if you think its about avoiding risk, you dont understand risk.
I'd like to see practical teaching in schools, things people could really benefit from in life. Learning the basics of practical skills is rather more useful than reading some crap that has nothing to do with reality. Schools emphasise fiction so much and dont teach simple life changing skills, like what credit cards are about and so on.
How exactly is changing the legal limit from 30 to 20 going to slow down those that do 60 past the front door? The problem is not with those that obey speed limits, its with the ones that take no notice.
The solution is to design and produce an evidence cam pack that is sold to the public, that anyone can use to do their own local policing if they choose. Ebough people would take that offer up to make a big difference. The device would contain vid camera, date stamping, speed detector, no external data inputs, official verifiable seals, and a set of instructions explaining what is needed in order to get a successful prosecution. Since the evidence would come from persons assorted, the requirements would be more stringent.
This would be a very cost effective way indeed to police.
True if new installs include more outdoor electrics than the old ones being replaced. :)
Seriously though, dead on. Old installs are a far bigger risk than non-part p new installs, I know from seeing some. They really show how trivial some of the issues with new installs are by comparison. Observed in old installs:
- Switches that lack spring action, and will sit arcing away happily.
- perished rubber wiring, sometimes with partially bare conductors wrapped around each other but perchance not yet touching.
- In one case even the lack of any fusebox - though that was an unusually ancient example.
- burnt out wires
- bare live wires
- bell wire and choc blocks on the surface at touch height.
- mains sockets hanging out of wall on wires
etc. These installs are more often owned by the poorest of people, and Part P will provide the maximum delay in rewiring. Yes, such installs are still in use. One of the neighbours had their perished bare rubber wiring redone only last year.
It all depends what and how the regulation occurs. Part p has got it all wrong.
What does the choice of French vs British units have to do with modernisation? People are so brain washed about this subject they really think that using the French units has something to do with modernisation or progress.
Real progress would be made if we accepted like grown ups that a) both systems are in widespread use b) both have their pros and cons c) neither is giong to disappear from the world any decade soon d) anyone with one brain can work with 2 systems.
Ask any American about this weights and measures fashion enforcement we're enduring, and they think its nothing short of a farce. Its almost fascist.
It's not about receipts. I am also not really fussed about DIY electrics as my instinct is that either the work will be done properly (? tested though) or done by someone who will not take notice of any regulations of any sort. But I do think it not unreasonable that anyone who offers electrical installation by way of business should be required to issue a simple certificate stating what has been done and that it complies. The problems - as evidenced by the current Part P self-certification debate and CORGI - is how to do this so as to achieve a reasonable level of control without being unnecessarily costly and bureaucratic.
For a nice picture of 'professional' electrics (Dolphin Bathrooms):
formatting link
the person who did this be let loose on the public?
Please explain how it is wrong or at least can not be used as an analogy? I am happy to admit that it doesn't fit as an analogy if you can show me a good reason why. As I said in another post perhaps I should have chosen a less contentious issue as an example because so many people have an axe to grind on this one (I notice from your other replies you seem particularly interested with the issue of speeding).
I was aiming to provide an example of a situation where there is wide spread failure to adhere a particular law and then use that to point out that it is nonsense to scrap a law for that reason. There are numerous situations where this is the case - speeding being just one of them. What I am asking for is that if the law is being widely flouted we examine the situation to find out why and then correct the law if necessary or enforce it more rigorously if it is correct. If it helps the debate we can replace speeding with X therefore allowing you to better separate the issues.
I wasn't aware that we were debating speeding. If you re-read my post you will notice that I wasn't offering any excuses for speeding.
Have these basic concepts _really_ been lost? I would argue that in actual fact these basic concepts are there and expressed as strongly as they have ever been and you have fallen foul of media hype and rose tinted glasses.
If you read books written long before either of us were born (I suggest Tess of the Durbervilles as a fine example) you will find that back then they also believed we were on a slippery slope, that there was general widespread moral decline and that it was better in their parents generation. You then have to ask the question: have we been on a moral decline since way back then? I think you would have to answer no, which therefore means that in actual fact little or nothing really changes from one generation to the next and the basic concept of right and wrong remains fairly constant. I freely admit that fashions change and some things that are taboo now were not so 200 years ago but peoples basic concept of right and wrong is broadly the same.
I agree with most of what you say but disagree with the part about avoiding risk. It is perfectly acceptable to avoid risk as long as you know why you are avoiding it and you made a concious decision that avoidance would be your strategy. Likewise acceptable is a perfectly acceptable strategy as long as you understand what you are accepting. These concepts are routinely applied in the IT world when analysing a business system I would be surprised if they weren't also best practice elsewhere as well.
I can *avoid* the risk of being burnt lighting my fire by not lighting my fire. If I light it then I must *accept* there is a risk of being burnt. However, I also apply whatever _sensible_ measures I can to
*minimize* the risk.
I agree that we should better prepare our children for life. It is a sad indictment of our school system that children leave not knowing how to manage their own finances.
I would however say that reading fictional works is not necessarily "crap". By encouraging children to read we can open their minds and show them how to think and make decisions for themselves. If you think that children, or even adults, are going to sit down and read an instruction manual for life you are sadly mistaken. The best we can do is educate them to the point where they can then continue their education themselves. In essence we must teach them how to learn.
Most uninformed people have not even heard of Part P - or any of the other parts, no doubt.
As I said, a quick trip into any B&Q, or Homebase will show you a total lack of any information either by way of information sheet, or knowedgeable person (what? in a DIY shed? Hah!) regarding Part P.
The wording of Part P leaves much to be desired in respect of what can, and cannot be carried out without notification, and what can, and cannot, be carried out by someone not deemed a "competent person" or an electrician.
Further, the legislation does not stipulate in any way how one is supposed to tell a "qualified" electrician from any other sort. The cart, in that respect, is well before the horse.
Sure - change should always be viewed with suspicion.
Paragraph 6.3 states that it is a limit of the Magistrate's powers, that they can't hear a case more than 6 months after the offence - any fines from contravening the building regs has to come before a magistrate. The alternative (or addition) to fines being levied is an Enforcement Notice - which would require you to make good any work, and I assume refusing to do this would be a new offence for which you could be fined. If the work is good, I (who am not a lawyer) can't see how you can be fined for failing to notify, once 6 months is up.
And there you put your finger on it. The more people are told what to do, the more they get used to it, and the less likely they are to make sensible decisions for themselves. As a population (my definition of 'society' does not include an entire country's population), we are actively discouraging people from making such decisions.
Some people cannot see the difference between 'I would like to see fox-hunting stop' and 'I would like to see fox-hunting stopped'.
Do you mean some drivers struggle to run so slowly? Or that some cars struggle to run so slowly in top gear? There must be very few cars that struggle to run at 20mph in one of their gears.
In general speed limits seem about right it's the ends of the scale that seem wrong, 30mph is too high a limit for narrow urban streets, 70mph is too low a limit for straight open motorways.
"Sugar Free" wrote | As I said, a quick trip into any B&Q, or Homebase will | show you a total lack of any information either by way | of information sheet, or knowedgeable person (what? | in a DIY shed? Hah!) regarding Part P.
My local B&Q (the one where the extension lead display has now been correctly rewired after three complaints...) has orange stickers on the electrical shelves pointing to the ODPM website, and the staff have heard of the changes. However they had only heard that the changes do not apply here after they stuck the stickers (presumably supplied by Head Office in England) up.
a question with lots of room for debate, one we will never agree on.
This appears to suggest that a) it isnt working, which is open to debate b) it can be made to work, which again is open to debate
it just doesnt compare. With electrics youve got both commercial and private work, which are 2 significantly different things. With cars huge numbers of people and injured and killed every year, making extensive government intervention into personal decisions justified. Electrical wiring is not like that in either respect. And so on, its like comparing apples with oranges, too many diffrernces.
I am? I didnt think I was, I just dont buy the usual lame excuses people come out with for their criminal actions, actions that cause a large number of injuries and deaths every year.
but its not that simple. Laws widely disregarded:
ban on drug importing and dealing ban on personal drug use ban on non-part p inspected home wiring ban on driving 71mph
The fact that theyre widely disregarded does not make them comparable at all. What we do with the law depends on other factors more than just how well observed the law is.
I think we all agree that would be nice, but IRL is isnt gonna work that way. Thats decidedly optimistic.
" everyone (ok not quite everyone but we'll pretend) speeds on motorways." is a lame excuse for speeding. The minute you start justifying speeding, you initiate debate.
completely
responsibility,
suggest
general
I never proposed anything of the sort.
It means no such thing of course.
not really. In the 70s it was considered right for adults to hit kids as and when they chose, in over 99% of cases. A teacher beating up a kid didnt raise an eyebrow then. Now that would get you crimnal charges and instant dismissal.
practice
lighting
I think this is just a case of reading the phrase 'avoiding risk' differently. I meant it as avoiding any risk rather than avoiding specific optional risks.
skills is
yeah, or even knowing they need to manage their finances! The level of ignorance is tragicomic.
Fiction, bullshit and crap mean basically the same thing, one is merely a polite word for the other. :) Fiction and bullshit both mean 'stuff they said happend that never actually did'. Its a funny thing, but that really is what fiction means. I dont expect to find anyone agree with that though!
In no way does reading fiction do that.
What does? Engaging in debates Reading non-fiction to find solutions to their problems
instruction
if schools chose to use such a manual in lessons, of course they will. Kids will study in class what theyre given.
That would be a great thing, and sadly one most school leavers lack. But we can do far more if we choose.
20mph isn't realistic. In fact some cars struggle to run so slowly.
How about this consideration extending towards those people who have to do huge mileages and would like to get home before Xmas. Sensible speed limits (Motorway - 85mph day, no limit night, suburb - 35mph day, 45mph night, dense town - 25 mph day, 35 mph night) would make more people obey them.
Agreed. It is interesting to watch things like Grand Designs abroad and Place in the Sun (?) where some people meet huge amounts of bureaucracy and others obviously use cowboys.
On a related aside - can somebody explain how the NEICEI (sp?) monopoly fits in with EU requirements for cross border harmonisation ? How does a German electrician now work in the UK (to a much higher standard than any UK electrician) installing those pre-fabricated Bauhaus houses ?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.