|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 17:03:11 GMT
Fine. We're agreed that the Brexit Bonfire will cost lives, we just don't agree on the number. It may cost lives it may not we do not know because that was not the point under discussion which was that your link implied that the requirement that "all building owners to maintain accurate registers of where there is dangerous asbestos to avoid accidental exposure" would be revoked and that was false and scaremongering. It seems you would rather address anything but that. You haven't demonstrated it was false. This is tedious. If you won't agree that increased exposure to asbestos will cost lives, at least we can agree that the danger has increased. At last, a palpable Brexit benefit. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 17:11:38 GMT
It may cost lives it may not we do not know because that was not the point under discussion which was that your link implied that the requirement that "all building owners to maintain accurate registers of where there is dangerous asbestos to avoid accidental exposure" would be revoked and that was false and scaremongering. It seems you would rather address anything but that. You haven't demonstrated it was false. This is tedious. If you won't agree that increased exposure to asbestos will cost lives, at least we can agree that the danger has increased. At last, a palpable Brexit benefit. I have demonstrated it you refuse to acknowledge that demonstration and go off all round the houses. So try and answer a simple question will revoking the 2012 regs mean that it will remove a companies duty to keep accurate records of the location of asbestos in buildings? Now you have said increased exposure to asbestos will occur, what aspect of the revoking of the 2012 regs means that that is a risk? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 17:15:02 GMT
You haven't demonstrated it was false. This is tedious. If you won't agree that increased exposure to asbestos will cost lives, at least we can agree that the danger has increased. At last, a palpable Brexit benefit. I have demonstrated it you refuse to acknowledge that demonstration and go off all round the houses. So try and answer a simple question will revoking the 2012 regs mean that it will remove a companies duty to keep accurate records of the location of asbestos in buildings? Who are these non-licensed people your link refers to? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 17:25:06 GMT
I have demonstrated it you refuse to acknowledge that demonstration and go off all round the houses. So try and answer a simple question will revoking the 2012 regs mean that it will remove a companies duty to keep accurate records of the location of asbestos in buildings? Who are these non-licensed people your link refers to? The people you say are going to be subject to increased exposure to asbestos. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 17:26:32 GMT
Who are these non-licensed people your link refers to? The people you say are going to be subject to increased exposure to asbestos. Seriously, who are they? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 17:39:06 GMT
The people you say are going to be subject to increased exposure to asbestos. Seriously, who are they? They are in the regs and are those who carry out work on asbestos that does not need to be carried out by licensed workers. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 18:03:25 GMT
They are in the regs and are those who carry out work on asbestos that does not need to be carried out by licensed workers. So, homeowners themselves, for example? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 18:12:37 GMT
They are in the regs and are those who carry out work on asbestos that does not need to be carried out by licensed workers. So, homeowners themselves, for example? Asbestos is notifiable so the regs apply from that point. If you do not notify as regards teh existence of asbestos you contravene the regs at the start. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 18:24:35 GMT
I don't know which regs you're even referring to. I'm too bored to go on, Sandy. I surrender unconditionally.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 18:34:25 GMT
I don't know which regs you're even referring to. I'm too bored to go on, Sandy. I surrender unconditionally. Well this is the problem your link provided factually inaccurate information as a piece of propaganda. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 18:42:40 GMT
I don't know which regs you're even referring to. I'm too bored to go on, Sandy. I surrender unconditionally. Well this is the problem your link provided factually inaccurate information as a piece of propaganda. Yeah, they have should have quit when they were ahead with the bit about choking children. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 22:06:15 GMT
Well this is the problem your link provided factually inaccurate information as a piece of propaganda. Yeah, they have should have quit when they were ahead with the bit about choking children. Not even sure if they are ahead on that. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 22:19:12 GMT
Yeah, they have should have quit when they were ahead with the bit about choking children. Not even sure if they are ahead on that. That's okay, Sandy. You didn't appear to be sure of very much throughout the entire conversation. Nobody seemed to mind. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 7, 2022 22:42:13 GMT
Not even sure if they are ahead on that. That's okay, Sandy. You didn't appear to be sure of very much throughout the entire conversation. Nobody seemed to mind. Oh I was pretty certain on the Asbestos regs because I had the HSE to fall back on and quote which for some reason you seemed unable to follow. The others I agree I am unsure but if I can cast doubt on one over the top claim, which undoubtedly the Asbestos one is, then that calls the rest at best questionable and at worst propaganda. I tend to favour the latter view. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 7, 2022 23:08:47 GMT
That's okay, Sandy. You didn't appear to be sure of very much throughout the entire conversation. Nobody seemed to mind. Oh I was pretty certain on the Asbestos regs because I had the HSE to fall back on and quote which for some reason you seemed unable to follow. The others I agree I am unsure but if I can cast doubt on one over the top claim, which undoubtedly the Asbestos one is, then that calls the rest at best questionable and at worst propaganda. I tend to favour the latter view. I give this review of our feeble efforts three stars. |
|
