Speech at the 24th session of the Senate on April 6, 2022 on the law on the integrated backup system
Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I’ll be roughly how long I was in my feature, so I’ll be shorter now. This is a non-systemic intervention in the law, which works de facto, there are some. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no need to modify it in this way.
I will still respond here to some of the things that have been said here, both from the point of view of the guarantee committee, which said that the operations center was simply authorized. That’s right, he only has permission. And only if there can be a delay. Otherwise, the incident commander has an obligation to inform. And it is true, because the intervention commander, he is present on the spot, he is the one who has the most information. Here Senator Zdeněk Nytra said that in Central Bohemia, for example, there is an operations center in Kladno and deals with several emergencies at once, if I simplify, because it will never happen that the emergency is only in Mladá Boleslav. Simply because every, in fact, even the smallest thing is an extraordinary event.
Which of the appointed heads of government is the best?
vote: 17584 people
The best incident commander always has this information, for example, the incident commander decides to call, say, a laboratory unit, quite simply, that is to say to find out, for example, if he there are harmful substances in the air. It practically says who, how to get information… The IPO also says that it is a question of a passage from authorization to duty. That’s true, but it’s really just a change within the operations center. It’s almost in quotes, I don’t mean completely overlapping the duty of the incident commander, because he says: This duty had the center of operations.
I repeat, the operations center does not need to have this information in order to decide who has the information, the commander is the incident commander. Indeed, in Mladá Boleslav, extraordinary situations have occurred several times, the big ones, when it was necessary to inform the inhabitants, whether it was an ammonia leak, for example in a winter stadium , on a small scale, there, for example, the operations center decided to inform, because there was a reason that delivered in the law, that is, there could be a risk delay, he directly informed the operations center, the operations center in Kladno informed that there was a leak of ammonia at the winter stadium in Mlada Boleslav. Whereas when Akuma or now the fire was on fire, the incident commander who was there immediately told us how to inform, we informed ourselves as a city, the operations center, but above all the city, because fortunately we have the sirens there, in which it is impossible to speak, so we can give the audio message, so we informed, we informed in this way, we also informed the municipal police, who went around the streets that are nearby.
I do think that shifting responsibility from the incident commander to the operations center can be detrimental, although I believe the effort, why that’s the case, why I’m presenting it here, is certainly to improve the law in that Sens. I think good intentions could make the law worse.
You can also support the writing of PL by taking out a subscription. We do not show ads to subscribers.
Are you a politician? Publish whatever you want without modification. Register here.
Are you a reader and want to communicate with your representatives? Register here.
Fact check BETA
A real mistake in the news? Help us fix it.