What they're saying about Glass Safety

Safe design should be an integral part of any design where people may be injured. But it is doubtful that there is yet sufficient evidence to warrant the extra, high cost to the community of making the fitting of safety glass mandatory."

The view of John Sutherland, immediate Past President of the New Zealand Institute of Architects begs the question: what level of evidence is necessary?

Acting Safety Controller at the Accident Compensation Corporation, Maurice Dagger: "In 1983 — the last year for which we have full figures available — 549 people struck against window or glass doors. Their injuries cost an initial $322,000 in compensation.

"These figures are provisional — lump sums related to permanent disabilities often take years to show up in the statistics. In any case, we are principally concerned with the prevention of injury and suffering."

Peter Sutton, Chief Project Officer for Consumers Institute echoes the concern with prevention.

"We advise people to put dividers into large glass areas or use toughened or laminated glass in areas where appropriate. The greater cost could put some people off — but then that depends what value people put on safety. All we can do is make them aware of the choices available."

Some 'safety features' may not be all that safe for children, as Alison Brown, Child Safety Division Marketing Officer for the Plunket Society points out.

"Crash or sight rails are a good idea, but they may be too high for children. We advise the use of safety glass in the lower panes."

Worried that not enough people buying or building a home know about safety glass, she says: "Architects and builders have an important responsibility, but that responsibility is shared by others in the community."

John Crawford, President of the New Zealand Glass Merchants

Sir Randal Elliott — "mesh glass not a safety glass."

Minister of Consumer Affairs, Margaret Shields: "promotion of safety glass necessary."

Federation says his members have been promoting the virtues of safety glass for years. The impetus for its use, he says, will have to come from those who specify what is to be used in buildings.

"But I am afraid that the people who manufacture products with the glass already in them, will continue to be somewhat irresponsible by continuing to put annealed glass into them."

A strong advocate of safety glass is Sir Randal Elliott, a Wellington eye surgeon and Chancellor of the Order of St John. He was a leading light in having laminated windscreens made compulsory in cars.

"In my opinion there is no place for either plate or mesh glass in situations where people can walk into them — home, hotels or gymnasia.

"A major problem is that people think mesh glass is safety glass — and so they lean on it or push on it. A person going through mesh glass ends up in considerably worse shape than if they had gone through plate glass."

Brian Surtees, Chief Officer of the Wellington Free Ambulance doesn't mince words either.

"The wrong use of glass can cause injuries which are substantial, disfiguring and permanent. I know of deaths in this region from people going through plate glass.

"In children it is often a case of not understanding the danger; in adults, it is usually a case of tripping or falling."

The new glass and glazing Standard goes some way to addressing these problems says Rosemarie Ashton, Public Relations Manager for the Standards Association of New Zealand.

"While many people may think it does not go far enough, it is important to recognise that the code sets minimum standards which currently are acceptable.

"The community may well later demand they be upgraded, in line with new thinking and new technology. In the meantime, the user may always specify higher quality glass safety for their own situation."