This time it is Chris Roycroft-Davis' turn to spout nonsense on a subject matter, conveniently glossing over the facts and the common sense. In his piece published on the Express website "Why didn't they send up a man with a chainsaw? UK's health and safety farce" he engages with all of the misconceptions and half-truths commonplace in right-wing unthinking ranting.
His argument is that 'elf and safety', as he constantly (and annoyingly) refers to it as, is a ridiculous blight on the British social landscape. It is inconveniencing and threatening lives of people for nothing, it is a product of the left, a disease that has infiltrated our otherwise rational Britain, and it is against our traditions. He is of course talking out of his posterior.
He begins his nonsensical swim through a pool of ill-informed idiocy, by citing that staple of autumnal/wintry weather and 'elf and safety' madness news, the trains, or more specifically the train disruption over 'trivial' rubbish. Using recognisable phrases in his rhetoric such as "leaves on the line" or the "wrong kind of snow" he is displaying the articles underlying issues, the facts do not support his argument. These train delaying inconveniences are perfect examples of this. The 'elf and safety' elements seem over the top and crazy, the truth about the hazards and complications caused by the weather actually prove them to be perfectly reasonable.
The "leaves on the line" cause something called Low Railhead Adhesion, low adhesion means slippery, slippery means slow acceleration and slow deceleration, slow deceleration is very dangerous, simple. The "wrong kind of snow" is a little more complicated. Powdery small snow flakes get blown around a lot in the turbulent air from the moving train, they sometimes get into electrical systems, they melt, water and electricity are not best friends, it causes problems. Yes snow covered countries do not have these problems, they are prepared and equipped for it, it is a common problem over there. It is not an everyday problem here. If commuters want it covered then they need to be prepared for even more expensive train tickets because it wouldn't come cheap. It is not loads of ridiculous 'elf and safety' bods being stupid, it is a simple fact that water and electricity mixing causes problems.
He cited these perceived instances of 'elf and safety' madness as a lead up to his articles main point. That a man who climbed a tree next to some lines, after being suspected of burglary, caused very long train delays. His solution would have been to unleash someone with a chainsaw to cut him out of a tree. A tad heavy handed if you want my opinion. What if the chainsaw sliced him up as his perch fell? Would he think that was okay? Would it be a fitting punishment for his (alleged) crime? Would potentially slicing him up with a chainsaw be justifiable just because he was causing delays? No, of course it would not. However, Chris Roycroft-Davis seems to think so, even stating that "if he gets hurt it serves him right". The punishment for burglary, according to at least one member of the right-wing idiot brigade, is now on round of Russian Roulette with a chainsaw.
The charming chappy then moves on to further absurdities to defend his already quite risible argument. He invokes the power of 'the war', the common go to card for anyone attempting to legitimise a poorly thought out position on something. He writes that "Britain (has) taken leave of its senses" because we would not have had 'elf and safety' assessments during 'the war'. He then gives three witless examples of 'elf and safety' gone mad. Examples that would have assured Britain lost to ze Germans in 'the war', as if it would strengthen his case.
(1) "Sorry Tommy, you can't run with your Bayonet fixed as you might trip and hurt someone."
(2) "Put that light out, you might dazzle a German bomber pilot and make him crash."
(3) "You can't shelter on the Underground because you might turn over in your sleep and roll of the platform."
I'm (not) sorry Chris Roycroft-Davis but you have just committed a major error in your arguing against those who defend 'elf and safety' regulations. Invoking 'the war', as justification for ignoring the 'elf and safety' regulations you seem to despise so much, does not provide a strong argument. In fact it makes it much weaker. In doing so he has created a straw man argument, he has created a weak argument no one has ever supported, and presented as the blanket views of 'elf and safety' supporters (in his opinion the left) in order to easily refute its necessity. When arguments resort to that they have ceded any attempt to have an informed discussion.
Chris then goes on to list quite a few poorly chosen examples of this 'elf and safety' culture being harmful to the UK populations enjoyment and safety.
(1) He almost missed a flight because a vehicle fire on the M25 caused the motorway to be temporarily closed.
I've looked and I cannot find mention of any four lane closures due to a vehicle fire. I did find a couple of two lane closures, which is understandable, car fires do create a lot of smoke and fire trucks are not the smallest of things. It is going to slow traffic to a standstill, it is impossible to avoid! If he meant all four lanes were closed I can only assume that Chris is exaggerating or making it up, both are common right-winger tactics. If he was blaming 'elf and safety' bods because a vehicle fire created delays on a motorway as they tried to put out the fire, in the process getting annoyed at the fire fighters because it almost made him late for a flight, then he has a warped sense of self-privilege. What the hell were they supposed to do then Chris?
(2) A suspected terrorist attack on a coach closing down the M6 for a few hours.
Once again this is an idiotic example and a lose-lose situation for the police. If it was a terrorist bomb, and the coach blew up, Chris Roycroft-Davis would have been screaming for their heads. However, it was not, so he thinks that it is an example of moronic 'elf and safety' bods. All because they took a member of the public's concerns seriously (defending the police hurts me, but it needs to be done here).
(3) Cordoning off Trafalgar Square because a man is threatening to jump off an eight foot high wall.
Okay this is ridiculous, if it is true. All we know about it is a man with a camera is describing what he thinks is happening. No statements from those concerned; no proof of his intentions. I will reserve judgement. But for the purposes of this post, Chris Roycroft-Davis misrepresents the information to aide his argument. He writes, about the man who attempted to jump off a wall, that "No wonder he was led away saying: "I do love England"". That is a lie, the man who filmed the incident (nothing happening) at one point said that, but Chris is attributing the quote to the wrong person. He has represented a false version of the facts (as all right-wingers do) to suit his agenda.
(4) Ipswich man climbs on a train station roof causing long and numerous delays.
What Chris fails to mention is that the roof was very weak and there was a possibility that it might give way. If it had he could have been seriously hurt but the electrical cables below, or possibly could have fallen onto the tracks. Whatever the dangers were to the man on the roof, there were some.
(5) School banning yo-yos. (6) Public kitchen hall removing knives. (7) Office staff not being allowed to use kettles.
All here from the Health and Safety Executive themselves.
(8) Man drowns in three foot deep lake, as fire fighters refuse to save him from 'level two' depth waters.
Tragic. Skewed news. This article explains that the Fire fighter in charge, Mr Nicholls, was told that the "body had been in the water for five or ten minutes" and that he saw "no obvious signs of life" thus making it "a body retrieval". In other words they chose not to go in to collect a dead body in an undignified manner, instead waiting for a specialist team who could do it whilst preserving the deceased man's dignity. An error in judgement perhaps, but it was not 'elf and safety' rules that ultimately stopped his rescue. Health and safety would not have stopped a trained life saver from saving a man they thought had a possibility of survival.
Finally, I cannot let this article go without pointing out the racism littering the comment section. IT IS DISGUSTING THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED ALREADY!
With reference to the picture accompanying the article, a black man sitting in a tree, the commentators have written:
jim c: Actually, he doesn't look out of place
judgenjury: Which zoo have I seen one of them in???
logen1: I must admit he looks very at home up there, I am sure that if they had tried to early to get him down, he would have just swung to another branch, and another tree
Reply: bobajob: They could even have got David Attenborough to make a documentary out of it
LouisaB: Oh and look at him .... surprise surprise. You all know what I mean ...
jbl: Cant chop the tree down and destroy its habitat
By not removing these comments (after reporting them to the police for racism) the Express are condoning these abhorrent attitudes.
No comments:
Post a Comment