Posted By J Knight Hi Folks, Seen this http://www.nu-riskservic...370495082415373446_1.htm ? What do we think? I worry about the proposed benefits of technology, among other things. Not that I'm a luddite, but I have seen the blue screen of death too often to entirely put my lilfe in a PCs hands. What I want to know, and this is a question for everybody in the social and health care business; will this impact on our fire provisions do you think, or am I getting worried about nothing? John

Posted By Robert. The idea is good, but, a point that was raised by the media is the fact that there are many villages etc in the Anglia and other areas which have the same name plus being in the same county adding the risk of a service being sent to the wrong place. Could that really happen? In years to come as another cost saving, the regional centres will be operated in a similar way as the banks---------not in this country!

Posted By J Knight As it happens this was in the BBC website's news yesterday; the FBU share our reservations it seems. There was an unhelpful comment from a home office bod saying that people who oppose the plans don't understand them. So there, we've been told, best keep our uninformed opinions to ourselves, John

Posted By Ken Taylor Makes a change to see you on this forum, Messy rather than FireNet. Entirely agree with FBU and firefighter concerns on this one. Computers cannot beat local knowledge and common sense. We have several roads with identical names listed under the same postal towns on the Isle of Wight and I can even envisage appliances being sent to the wrong side of the Solent or even Newport in Wales. When you consider the money wasted by government, it's very annoying to see them trying to save expenditure at the risk of human lives.

Posted By J Knight Glad you think it's a good idea. anon1234; you have evidently given the subject a great deal of thought and I thank you for your creative and incisive contribution to the debate. If you want to do a wind-up, at least make it funny, John

Posted By J Knight Hi anon, no, it's not that you don't agree, it's the way you say it. There are serious difficulties with this idea, mainly connected with over-reliance on technology (which will almost certainly cost more than it is expected to) and the loss of local knowledge. These issues have been reflected by other contributors to the thread. The FBU has only been mentioned by one correspondent (me) in passing, and I haven't been especially influenced by their position. In the face of this your response appeared flippant and scathing; in fact you appear to be saying what the government bod on the BBC site was saying; if we object we don't understand. Maybe where you and I differ is that I don't think the FBU can work with the other parties to make the technology sufficiently robust. I have serious difficulties with technology driven services, and I don't like putting my life in their hands, especially where the problem set is so large. I'm not convinced, because of my experience and what I know about IT, that such systems are ever robust enough. I know that Air Traffic Control relies on technology, but finding Station Road in Sheffield is hard enough for people who know the place (fyi there are at least five in the City) without relying on somebody (or a PC) in Harrogate having the same knowledge. It is certainly possible to think that this is a good idea, but aside from putative cost savings, what benefits do you think it will it bring? You may see objections as just the FBU bleating about loss of jobs (and after all, that's their job) but I don't, I don't care overmuch about the loss of jobs. I have to worry about 17 large buildings full of people who can't be evacuated, and who rely on the fire service turning up quickly, not having to wait while somebody reboots the server. You may turn out to be right, and I sincerely hope you are, since there is now no stopping this move, I just doubt it, that's all, John

Posted By Robert. Or Bangladesh

Posted By Ken Taylor - but wouldn't it be better if the modern technology was in the hands of more 'local' people who are familiar with the locations, road works, traffic issues, planned large public events, local common names for buildings, best ways to approach large sites, etc and to interpreting the speech of local distressed callers?

Posted By J Knight The technology I have the problem with isn't stuff like knowing where the caller is (which might help, depending where they're calling from, but note previous posts regarding confusion of Orkney & Shetland, a small error of only 300 or so miles), it's the command and control technology, if you like, the stuff that brings all the various gizmos together. This won't do what it says on the tin, it will cost a lot more than it's supposed to, and because of the various tweaks it has to have to make it work during installation, it will, at least initially, be unstable and expensive to maintain. I cite for example the new NHS information system, the numerous Council Tax IT problems and in fact almost any large scale public IT project as evidence, John

Posted By Ken Taylor Not rude, Steve, just wrong. We are saying that nearer is better, human knowledge and experience is useful and large computer systems do let you down. Are you saying that outsourcing the system to India would be OK - or am I being ....