over the years the business “community” regularly whinges that ravers in disused buildings are “parasites” and they create “unsafe situations and do not go through the proper channels”.

Now there are are a lot of clues in party buildings such as calendars, posters, old files left around which show when a place was last used…many have only just fallen out of use (within the last 5 years).

Yet some of the infrastructure – the important bits of the building which make the workers in it safe in is “prehistoric”.

Often, despite other clues such as the remains of computer network installations and digital telecoms lines, which would indicate a business was there until recently, vital safety critical items such as fire alarms, newer, safer electrical distribution networks and proper means of escape (in case of fire) are often non-existent; in many areas there are other hazards. I’ve even encountered hazardous chemicals just left behind in buildings when they should be recovered and disposed of correctly…

Its often not the case that ravers (or even gypsies) have stolen items or trashed them; they simply were never there to start with, or a long standing hazard was never fixed (you often see improvised warning signs such as “caution: dangerous floor upstairs” that were not put there by crews!)

Rig crews regularly encounter electrical systems of questionable safety… often the kit they are bringing in is safer than what was there!

I know of several people who are spending their own time and money going to college to learn the wiring regs and pass their C&G exams so they can legally and safely work on their own rigs and the wiring in venues. Those who are building studios take great care to ensure their power and equipment is safe.

Other people learn first aid, there is actually a fairly good health and safety culture amongst todays rave crews – the safety record of free parties is no worse than licensed clubs (where profit overides safety same as normal industry)

For instance someone who had a fit as a recent party was immediately put in the recovery position – and recovered long before the Emergency Services arrived (cops were dispatched instead of an ambulance due to the “blue lights” paranoia over a rave!)

It worries a lot of us to think that people were actually working in these unsafe buildings until fairly recently. worse still its obvious in many cases that bosses had money to spend on new computers (or salary raises, they often leave confidential accounting paperwork lying around!) yet could not find money to invest in their staff safety or premises…

it definitely seems that many bosses and building managers are simply ignoring statutory safety rules; and when challenged by the authorities simply claim “costs are too high”, shut up shop, lay off their workers and relocate elsewhere or outsource their manufacturing to overseas sweatshops…

its ironic that the unlicensed occupation of these buildings may well be safer than their previous “legitimate use”, and this mismanagement and lack of care may be one reason why UK manufacturing is in such a dire state..

But two wrongs don’t make a right, the buildings are still being occupied unlawfully and some costs being passed on to others (the other businesses on the industrial estate pay for clear up in increased service charges)

perhaps an enterprising property management firm could make a positive out of this situation?

Some of these buildings clearly will never reach “market rents” which are inflated anyway, but could be converted for both low-cost residential use and social enterprises – including the resurgence of manufacturing in the UK – and the odd rave or two under the TENS laws! (the space, power and escapes are there; and there would be less people to annoy..)

Much of the work could be carried out by younger people on apprenticeships – creating a much-needed pool of British workers to learn skills of the construction industry whilst creating a base for the community…

it may in the short term force down rent prices – but then new customers would be created who wouldn’t previously have used the site! would be better than letting them become dangerous structures fit only to be knocked down (and then the site become a brownfield as no one can afford to start the work…)