1. Concerns were expressed to me about collisions between cyclists and pedestrians:the database records do not show any actuals in 2005. However, it has to be remembered that the database are RECORDED events only: others may be happening. HSE do suggest segregation of pedestrian and vehicles (is a cycle a vehicle?)in the workplace (and it is ONLY in the workplace rather than generally). I believe that the colour of roads and markings at crossings will be improved.

4.The 12/59 is for information: I am recording facts. I cant get a summary together quickly but may be able to get this to you for a future meeting: either Will Hudson or John Emmines attend your meetings I believe given enough warning.

The "site" means exact location in this context. For example, an accident could occur on the Madingley Road and still be reported: sketches and such like help with the identity but it is often unclear. And yes, we do try to follow up and get further details, but we are reliant on people sending the information back if it is missing, and if the accident was to a passer by it may not be possible to get any further details. Sometimes too, we do not get an accident form until months later. Having said this, many reports are well-completed.

The "it" in connection with first aid means the opportunity to actually give first aid: most first aiders never get to go to an incident.

By network groups I mean the two groups referred to at the beginning of the report. These are the two site-based groups which meet and are convened at different times and which cover all anture of site-wide issues. Security will know about many incidents, many of which are NOT safety but could perhaps be of interest. An example might be thefts: a spate could suggest building access problems.

My comment about the first aid leader is to suggest that information shared would be useful and anonymised. The first aid group leader could, for instance, start a meeting by asking his "consituency" if they have had any incidents to deal with. If there are, then the first aid group leader can simply report this to the site committee. My overall aim here is:

• that all know about all incidents
• information is shared effectively
• best use is made of learning opportunities

What is the best way to do that? HSD get reports of accidents and incidents, but NOT security breaches, nor child molestation possibilities, nor vehicle incidents say. Most issues discussed at the committee are not safety: they are about environment, buildings, children, buses, retail etc etc.

WSC and WCSC has some common membership: it ought to be possible to share common information: the chairs of both could perhaps do that.

5. B and E is Buildings and Estates.

My view is that you need to segregate all types of user: if you have been run over by a cyclist you will know it hurts! It does however seem to be acceptable in some circumstances to have joint cycle and foot ways: this will depend on use of course. I find the Coton footpath quite dangerous to walk on as bikes seems to expect me to leap out of the way: that, however, is a personal view.. Cycles here means all type of things from trikes, to bikes with trailers etcwhich are quite big. My own concern here is that not only will there be lots of users going to the Cavendish, but there may be some mobility impaired people for whom extra care may be needed if patients will be visiting the new building for scans.

I cant supply details of bids as I don't bid for or control the budgets.

On signs, if you disagree about the signs erected, then you need to make sure that your disagreement is communicated in writing, with your justifiaction to Mr Dowling, copied to HSD and noted at the site committee.

I hope the site committee can continue to meet regularly, and I believe that is likely to continue to be so when new work starts on two buildings at the far west of the site.