Posted By Sharon A Cathedral pancake race that is part of a 600-year-old tradition has been stopped because of health and safety rules. http://www.telegraph.co....08/02/05/npancake105.xml

Posted By Al.. This is the Telegraph so liberal pinches of salt are required. The headline would be more accurate if it read "Requirements of insurance companies trip up pancake race". Reading on you will find: "Any organisation that runs an event has to go through risk assessments. The insurance companies demand it and in the end you have to work out whether it's a risk you take." A resident of Ripon, said: "It's totally daft. Why should paperwork get in the way of kids having fun? We seem to hear it all the time now but it's bureaucracy gone mad." Not bureaucracy...simply the requirements of the insurance industry. If you want the insurance cover, you have to meet their requirements. There is always an option to run the event in the way it has been run for 600 years and without the insurance cover. There is no compulsion on them to have insurance.

Posted By Pete48 And how boringly predictable and typical that this forum should highlight it, not once but with two separate threads already. It happens, get used to it; and if you absolutely must tell someone about it, send an e-mail to IOSH as they asked us to do, please? The louder you shout about it in public, the louder will become the clamour to keep publishing this rubbish.

Posted By Tabs Please ignore Pete48 (in the nicest way possible) ... I don't read any of the rags but I do enjoy reading and responding to these articles when they are posted here. Pete48: This is a discussion forum, for discussing things. If we don't discuss and rationalise them, who does? I don't believe the doctrine of "ignore them and they'll go away". Please feel free not to click on the links which are obvious in their title :-)

Posted By Bob Shillabeer Has anyone seen the Times? They headline thier report as 'Pancake race is tossed aside after 600 years by health and safety rules. Thefirst paragraph reads "A pnacake race that goes back 600 years and has undergone a revival in the past decade has been abandoned because of health and safety rules" This clearly expresses a feeling that this is about the health and safety issues it raises and not about insurance, although the report does say later the insurance companies demand it but the feel has already been set by the report that it is H&S that has caused its cancellation. A clever bit of spin. The report goes on to say that police costs are to high at £1,200. It alsao quotes people as saying the main issue is the cobbled streets that people could slip on. This stupidity never happened before another stupid quote I think. What about people going about thier usual bussines and walking or rushing over the cobbles, where is the extra risk? Ar yesy the risk is if a child falls and hurts itself the insurance company would be expected to pay out, it's just an aversion by those organisations to having to pay out to the victim of an accident. On another line how does the situation of Volenti no fit injuria rest with this. It means it is an insurance thing and not pure H&S

Posted By TomP Now on the Beeb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/...th_yorkshire/7227897.stm Perhaps the real reason for the cancellation is: Bernard Bateman, one of the organisers, said they were told they would have to pay £250 to Harrogate Borough Council to close Kirkgate Road, where the race takes place. Perhaps we should help them with the 'mountain' of risk asessments to be done. I figure I could cover it in two lines...... Any advance on two?

Posted By garyh see excellent HSE response http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/2008/pancake.htm

Posted By Al.. Excellent response from the HSC chair. Issued in a timely manner too. The matter should not however stop here. I suggest that Judith Hackitt's comments should now be brought to the attention of those at the Cathedral who made the decision to cancel the event. I feel strongly that the best way to tackle these B-C matters is to investigate the process which resulted in the decisions being made and the information and advice which informed them. Something went wrong. Only by finding out what went wrong can we hope to prevent similar mistakes in the future. It would be a useful case study. The general press would not be interested but specialist health and safety publications should be. Case studies like this this should be of considerable interest to practitioners, both new and experienced, who are interested in how risk aversion can arise and their own roles in its prevention.

Posted By Pete48 Well that got your blood racing didn't it? Mind you it will teach me to post before consuming enough caffeine first thing! I have a view for you that says it is elf and safety that is the reason. Why does it cost so much to insure? why is there a need for such a police presence? why are marshals needed? I would have thought that the answer was to ensure the health and safety of those present, public, participants etc. Are all the persons involved in assessing the risks incompetent in their disciplines or is there really something in there somewhere? The point being that we can huff and puff as much as we like; we can continue to protest every time a story appears; we can feel aggrieved or misrepresented; we can worry about the impact on our professional lives. Sadly, IMHO, nothing will change because of all that. Or at least I see no evidence that anything is changing. The stories appear with regular monotony, the next one will be about Easter eggs no doubt. We know it isn't the simple case presented each time; others don't really care or will not be bothered to look in enough detail. By repeatedly chatting, in public, about these stories we actually give them a weight they don't deserve and paradoxically prove the point of the stories. I am reminded of a quote from a very senior oil company executive who, speaking after a significant and rather high profile spillage, told the PR people that " "there is no point in telling people that we have spent £10 million on putting it right, all they care about is how many seagulls we have killed and why we wont kill anymore". I was merely suggesting that perhaps we should start looking for seagulls and saving them rather than just repeatedly telling everyone else they are wrong after the story breaks?

Posted By Roland Ellison See SHP coverage: Health and safety accusations a load of 'crepe' in pancake race row http://www.shponline.co.uk/arti...ame=news&article_id=7137