Risk Assessment
Common Questions

Common Questions

No matter how much we try to plan, the nature of our activities (filming wildlife, newsgathering, etc.) often means that we don't know the full situation until we arrive - how can we be expected to complete an accurate location-specific risk assessment form within the BBC process?

The law requires you to provide a suitable and sufficient risk assessment and to comply with its findings. Even if you don't know every specific, you can find out plenty about the activities you propose and the location itself, enough to form the basis of your assessment. Further information can often be got from recces, where the pressure of filming / recording is absent. Any further clarification may have to be ascertained on location (and the risk assessment form amended locally), but every effort should be made to keep this to a minimum.

We are going to a meeting on the other side of town - do we need to have a risk assessment for this?

No, provided the risks involved are not greater than you would encounter in everyday life.

How does the BBC risk assessment process acknowledge or cope with editorial news value (e.g. in a front line war situation), when the safety risks would likely be judged unacceptable in most other situations?

What risks are or are not 'acceptable' is a line management decision based on all available factors, including the risk and nature of potential injury, editorial merit, the competence and willingness of those involved, the value and practicality of available controls, etc. The greater the risk, the higher up the management line the decision must be made. The BBC process does not specify an upper limit where the residual risk can not be authorised, though BBC Safety will need to be consulted in circumstances where this is greater than 'Low'.

Our risk assessment identifies the risk from an activity (e.g. tree climb) as being "high", which makes me unsure, but the contributor who will be exposed to this risk is happy to go ahead is this ok?

You must remember that should the contributor suffer injury as a result, both you (the manager responsible) and the BBC could be held liable in both criminal and civil law. In any criminal proceedings, the fact that you had identified the residual risk as 'high' but still let it happen is likely to count against you. In any such situations, you must discuss this with BBC Safety beforehand.

I am knowledgeable in the activity we propose with contributors (sea kayaking) and have been asked to complete this aspect of the risk assessment as a result, but does this mean I take some responsibility from the Producer if things go wrong?

It depends a lot on the circumstances of the accident and on your role. The Producer / Editor / Line Manager is ultimately responsible for the safe management of the activity and as such, can be held accountable (along with the BBC) for any injury or loss which results. If you are in the position of being an expert or professional adviser, and your advice was wrong, yes, you could be held accountable. However, if are not in this position (but just knowledgeable), it won't be held against you but may weaken the defence of the Producer (or the BBC), because they perhaps should have asked someone more suitable.

Our contractor has provided a risk assessment that looks good but is entirely generic in nature, and does not consider the location at all - what should I do?

Check the risk assessment carefully and compare it with your knowledge of the location. If there are not any location-specific hazards (including those of your own making) which could affect the contractor's activities (and therefore the content of their risk assessment), then no need for you to do anything. But if this is not the case, you should return the risk assessment to them, pointing out the deficiencies and request an amended version. You don't need to be an expert in their activities to identify obvious failings.

Risk AssessmentCommon Questions

Risk Assessment
Common Questions