Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Part P again - I invite you to sign my Petition to the Prime Minister
A few weeks ago, in the discussion about nominating Part P for Radio 4's
Christmas Repeal award, the suggestion was made that an alternative approach would be to raise a No. 10 petition - which I have duly done. I am aware that there is already one about abolishing Building Regs in general - but that one doesn't have a prayer, and mine is far more specific. You can find it at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Part-P-Review/ The petition says: "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to carry out an urgent review into the way in which Part P of the Building Regulations operates in practice, and to make changes designed to re-establish high levels of electrical safety without imposing unnecessary practical and financial constraints on professional electricians or competent DIY enthusiasts." The 'More details' section says: "Part P isn't working! The number of relevant fatalities has more than doubled since its introduction [Hansard 98144] probably due to the use of dangerous temporary 'lash-ups' rather than safe fixed wiring – thus avoiding the hassle and expense of complying with Part P. There is no evidence to indicate that there has ever been a problem with non-professionally installed fixed wiring. Self certification imposes a substantial overhead on small electrical firms. Complying with Part P is very difficult and expensive for amateur electricians – encouraging the use of less safe, exempt options. Even when part of a larger project, many Building Control departments are illegally refusing to perform Part P testing within the scope of the Building Regs fee. In summary, Part P is counter-productive and should be scrapped. At very least, its scope should be substantially reduced by, for example, exempting all installation work in domestic premises on the householder's side of the Consumer Unit." I wanted to say rather more than that - but the 'more details' part has a strictly enforced 1000 character limit, so I had to condense it dramatically. I hope that you will all be able to support it. -- Cheers, Roger ______ Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks. PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP! |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Lost? here is your invite... | Home Repair | |||
Open Invite | Woodworking | |||
Window sills: Prime, Paint Caulk or Prime Caulk Paint? | Home Repair | |||
Highway Sign control by Digital Sign | Electronics Repair | |||
Gunner: invite me for visiting in CA | Metalworking |