Highland Council points to deaths in Australia, Spain and England as it defends "embarrassing" bouncy castle ban and U-turn
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
Highland Council has defended its short-lived bouncy castle ban by citing fatal accidents in Australia, Spain and the south of England.
The local authority staged a dramatic U-turn on the policy yesterday just five days after stating that inflatables would be banned from council grounds and premises.
Widely criticised for over-zealous actions, even the council’s own former Inverness Events Manager Gerry Reynolds slated the “impromptu” decision, saying he had booked bouncy castles on council properties for over 20 years without incident.
RELATED: Highland Council U-turn on bouncy castle ban after councillors intervene
The much-criticised move threatened to hit a host of school summer events such as fetes, sports days and, potentially most damagingly, parent council fundraisers at more than 200 Highland properties.
It came to light after the owners of Croy-based family-run firm Mascot Madness Entertainment were turned away at the gates of one primary school and then suffered six more cancelled bookings.
The firm lost over £2000 in bookings and co-owner Danielle Stewart told the Courier the business faced financial ruin if a schools ban remained in place.
A new clause prohibiting the use of bouncy castles is believed to have been inserted in council rules at the end of March, but there was no pre-warning or consultation with schools and contractors and no consultation and debate with elected councillors.
Highland Council, in a statement yesterday, bowed to pressure from the public and councillors and removed the ban.
A spokesman said it had drawn up “new conditions of let requirements” for the safe use of inflatable devices.
But the now-retired Mr Reynolds rubbished the suggestion the rules were new, claiming the council had simply reinstated previous guidance, and called the council's U-turn "embarrassing".
The Courier’s checks with Scotland’s other 31 local authorities suggest that Highland Council would have stood alone in banning bouncy castles.
Of 21 that have so far responded, all said there was no ban in place or being considered.
Bouncy castle operator Mrs Stewart also raised concerns that the council had caused reputational damage, with a likelihood that future business would be hit by unnecessary fears over bouncy castle safety stoked by the council.
Asked to respond to that concern, a Highland Council spokesman said: “The Council is not making up the risk.
“(On January 4, last year) an eight-year-old girl died after a bouncy castle in Spain was lifted several feet into the air by strong winds at a fairground.
“In December 2021) in another incident in Australia, six children died after a bouncy castle was lifted by strong winds, causing nine children who were inside to fall from 32 feet in the air.
(In 2018) a three-year-old, Ava-May Littleboy, was thrown from an inflatable trampoline on a beach in Norfolk and died from a head injury.
“Summer Grant (7) died in 2016 after being crushed to death by a bouncy castle at a park in Harlow, Essex.”
Mrs Stewart, though, has argued that all incidents listed occurred through unsafe use of bouncy castles, where contractors had failed to follow safety requirements.
Asked how the council would regulate businesses offering bouncy castle hire, the spokesman issued a revision of the statement issued yesterday, adding: “The new conditions of let are intended to enable the council to ensure that, for any particular event, inflatable devices meet all required safety standards.
“The operators of these devices (must) show that they have carried out appropriate risk assessments; that they hold the appropriate insurances to cover any risk to users of the equipment and to cover any other risks that can arise from these inflatable devices being used on Council premises.
“The onus is on the operator to show they have met all the appropriate safety standards.”
Responding to criticism over secrecy and a lack of involvement in decision-making from elected members, the spokesman said: “The day-to-day use of premises where lets take place is an operational matter.
“However, given the level of interest shown by members of the public and elected members, we have reflected on the Council’s position and made the changes which were described in today’s position statement.
“So we have listened, reflected on the feedback, and made the changes set out in the statement.
“We think we have come up with a reasonable solution going forward which will enable this activity to take place while appropriately managing the risks that can arise from it.”
