THE WORKSHOP began with facilitators Ross Newman of BM Trada and David Sibert of the Fire Brigades Union introducing Mike Reynolds of the ACPO’s Secured by Design scheme. Mr Newman ran through some of the history and background of Secured by Design, insofar as it began as a result of the explosion in the installation of uPVC doors and windows coinciding with a rise in burglary in the late 1980s.
Secured by Design started as a scheme that recognised third party accredited goods and services, he said, but had developed into a concept with crime prevention at its core. The brand now supported design guides for architects with schemes for new homes and new schools having been launched in 2014.
Mr Newman explained that product manufacturers obtained the Secured by Design logo, for which they paid a licence fee, and this effectively gave them national police approval, as officers were allowed to name Secured by Design accredited products and services. He clarified that Secured by Design was operated by a not-for-profit subsidiary of ACPO with surpluses being invested back into crime prevention activity. Reporting the success of the scheme, the workshop learnt that burglary on Secured by Design estates generally reduced by 50%, while criminal damage and car crime fell by 25%, and security requirements were now being introduced into the Building Regulations from 2015.
Risk perceptions
The open session began with a discussion surrounding perceptions of the risk from crime as compared with the risk from fire. While it was agreed that fear of crime was generally widespread, higher spending on both crime and fire prevention products was regarded as a grudge purchase. Some in the room fondly remembered the fire certificates associated with the 1971 Fire Precautions Act, recalling their popularity with end-users preferring a prescriptive approach, but there was acceptance that life had moved on.
It was overwhelmingly agreed that in the fire industry, while products were generally tested and/or third party certificated, installation was the major issue. The fact that so many products entered the market via builders merchants (the figure of 80% of fire doors was quoted) and so those installed by non-specialists were regarded as a problem, as was the lack of action by the enforcing authorities.
Fire safe register
CFOA renewed its offer to host a ‘fire safe’ register, similar to the concepts encompassed in the Secure by Design scheme, where participating products and installers would be ‘deemed to comply’ with published guidance. This idea had been floated previously, but had not been greeted with much market enthusiasm particularly from the certification bodies.
The usual cries for ‘insurers to act as regulators’ was countered with an explanation of the realities of over-capacity in the commercial insurance property market and the dangers of relying on insurers to carry out this role. A general discussion about the need to level the playing fields resulted in agreement that certification did have a role to play in compliance and that the Secured by Design initiative offered a model that could potentially be adapted to work within the fire sector. Conclusions regarding how this would be best achieved appeared to remain elusive at this time.