|
Written by Uponnothing
|
|
Thursday, 18 June 2009 21:19 |
|
Interestingly this story seems to bemoan the lack of PC-gone-mad elf 'n' safety involved:
Two little girls were left screaming in agony after they stepped on to a newly-laid tarmac path and had the skin burned from their bare feet.
Sophie Woodley, six, and her sister Jessica, four, were on a trip to the beach when they walked across the blistering hot surface.
They needed emergency surgery under general anaesthetic at a specialist burns unit.
Now their parents, Robert and Hazel Woodley, are planning to sue for damages, claiming there were no proper signs or barriers to warn pedestrians of the newly-laid surface...
Mr Woodley said there were a few cones on one side of the path but there was no tape to stop people walking across the hot surface.
No doubt Richard Littlejohn will launch a stinging attack on the family and young girls tomorrow pointing out that 'when he was a lad' they used to burn their feet on freshly laid tarmac all the time and he is all the better for it. No doubt he will point out that any attempt to cordon off the area would have been a 'liberal-New-Labour-Guardianista social experiment' and 'another example of how elf 'n' safety was banning roadworks and the right of people to cross the road'.
Or perhaps the predictable turd will write some devilishly un-clever skit comparing the Battle of Britain with the great wheelie bin revolt. Either way, the commentators are not amused by anyone pointing out that Health and Safety is designed to prevent accidents like this occuring:
How awful for these little girls. However, would loads of signs and barriers not be deemed as, to quote a phrase, "Elf and Safety gone mad?" and perhaps even "The nanny state" at it again?
You can't have it both ways.
- Aljardi, Worcs, UK, 18/6/2009 14:58
|
