Posted By Rob T
Since when were IOSH as an organisation empowered to issue statements on the smoking issue on behalf of ALL the membership (see news releases). If someone had taken the trouble to look at the Chat room for instance, they would have seen that in past discussions there have been vociferous differences of postion on the subject. This is such an emotive subject that I would have thought it was something to keep our (collective) noses out of. Before issueing such statements in future I suggest that IOSH actually ask the full membership for their views.

Rob Todd CFIOSH

Posted By Frank Hallett
The opinion posted by Rob T really goes to the heart of what IOSH is actually about. The fact that it's about smoking is not really relevant. I am a determined non-smoker, but that's not relevant to the following either.

As a "Professional Body" [but not a Professionals Body] that has now been recently recognised as an official NGO [see, I do read other bits on this site], it should drive those making pronouncements on behalf of the Professional Body to ensure that there has, at least, been a suitable period of consultation, and due consideration of the responses, before presenting an "official" pronouncement.

It's not really about how you percieve that you will be disadvantaged by incoming legislation based upon authoritative statements by influential organisations; although that has relevance. It's about ensuring that the officially recognised body can demonstrate that the basis of whatever arguement is publicly put forward is supported by a sufficient majority of the membership [who give the body its public credibility] as well as "accepted science" [often a smokescreen - tee hee - for current dogma] to be sustainable in public debate.

We really cannot afford to have any other image. For a professional body to be publicly in disagreement with a substantial proportion of its membership on public policy issues is a disaster.

Frank Hallett

Posted By Mark Talbot
Are you (Rob and Frank) suggesting a change to how IOSH works at that level?

I don't read anything in the response to The Times saying that the statement is representing the opinion of the membership. There is an implication that it is representing the opinion of IOSH (given the status of the writer, and no statement of personal opinion).

I think there is still a fundemental difference between the ISOH (Corporate) opinion and the opinion of membership.

It would appear to me that it would cripple IOSH to ballot our opinion each time it wanted to issue a statement. Regardless of the subject.

I haven't read the Constitution cover to cover, but it probably allows for this ...

I don't think I want to vote on everything - but I can see the argument very clearly.

Just my opinion.

Mark Talbot CMIOSH

Posted By Frank Hallett
In response to Mark T

Credibility, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder!

Just look at the way that the media will publicly savage any perceived weakness unmercifully until the majority believe it to be true or relevant.

All of the recognised political parties try very, very hard to get this right; even the HSE tries to ensure an underlying concensus on topical matters - what makes IOSH immune?

Frank Hallett

Posted By J Knight
Surely the IOSH letter in question wasn't about smoking as such (and by the looks of things neither was the 'article' in the Times) but was a response to a much wider attack on the role of the state in H&S. By the looks of the letter the 'journalist' concerned (probably a 17 year old on his gap year to judge by the maturity of his position) did need to have a few fundamentals about the real world pointed out to him, which is what IOSH did,

John

Posted By Ruth Doyle
Dear Members,

Thank you for raising this important issue for discussion. I would like to clarify a couple of points:

- IOSH is a charity, with a responsibility and a role to communicate the importance of health and safety to the world at large (a duty audited by the Charity Commission)

- We are also a membership organisation and professional body, and members are represented in all our strategic and operational decisions via Council of Management, Board of Trustees, and the various committees and working parties that, alongside employees, deliver services to members

One of the most important things that IOSH can do, as both charity and membership body, is campaign and lobby decision makers and opinion informers (such as government and media) on key health and safety issues.

Sometimes this campaigning activity will take the form of news release or letter to the press, sometimes in policy formation or direct approaches to government. In some cases, IOSH (through its employees and volunteer members) must form opinions about key issues either before they emerge, or as important news breaks – for example, this week’s proposals on Incapacity Benefit Reform. In these situations, it isn’t practical to ballot all members and form a majority or consensus opinion – but you can rest assured that members have been involved in researching and developing that policy or opinion (through committees, Board, and employees, many of whom are themselves members).

I would also draw your attention to a very important area of the site where members have the opportunity to express their personal and professional opinions on proposed government legislation – the Consultation Documents. http://www.iosh.co.uk/condocs

Here, IOSH actively seeks your input and opinion, and will directly represent your views in our submission to government - I wonder did any of you take part in the consultation on “The smokefree elements of the Health Improvement and Protection Bill”? http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...&cid=118&status=archived

Finally, in an extensive piece of qualitative research with members recently, one of the things members say they most want IOSH to do is express opinion about public issues, even if that means that individual members don't always agree with the views expressed. The message from members is clear – they want IOSH to become a more public-facing, higher profile and more campaigning organisation. I hope you agree.

Ruth Doyle, IOSH Director of Communication

Posted By Rob T
Hi Ruth and thankyou for your explanation. Whilst I agree with almost all of what you have said it must be noted that there are certain subjects that will always be highly controversial particularly "passive" smoking, white asbestos cement and RF masts for instance. I think that these types of areas, where it is well known that H&S professionals have strongly differing opinions, should not be officially commented on by IOSH on BEHALF of the members because (by definition of the disagreements internally) - IOSH is not talking on behalf of the vast (vast being the operative word) majority of members.

Rob