Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Leadbelly
Hi folks,
Having studied the "think about" publication for elected members I can clearly see how elected members collectively can impact on H&S, i agree they should ask relevant questions about the management of H&S and consider it in the decisions they make.
The guidance suggests that portfolio holders may be more liable to enforcement that other members - but what i struggled to find was a realistic example of where a member could individually be held responsible. I have found it difficult to identify a set of circumstances where a member would individually make a decision. Any thoughts/help would be appreciated.
Has this ever happened? Is there a case where a member has been prosecuted or even had a notice issued against them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Coshh Assessor
I'm confused. Elected members of what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Leadbelly
Sorry - elected memebers of Local Authorities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Phil Rose
LB
I read (well OK I partially read the same doc before I lost the will!). I can't help but feel that the new guidance could have been more succinct and to the point!
The bit about portfolio holders is a bit of a rehash of some advice given by the HSE/LGE a few years back, when cabinet systems were becoming popular.
I can't think of a case myself where an individual member has been held personally responsible (oh except Dame Shirley Porter and the Building Stable Communities 'scandal' in which she was found to have acted illegally and subsequently agreed to repay a significant sum - 12m I think).
I suppose that a portfolio holder could be held personally responsible under S36/37 - but I am not sure if I can see that happening unless they have made a recorded decision to do or not do something that subsequently leads to an offence being committed.
Hope that helps
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Linda Westrupp
I am not aware of any cases and as the previous reply says, unless they have made a decision which is recorded in committee minutes there would be little evidence that they have had a direct influence. The usual people who would be named in a prosecution would be the Chief Executive, the Director and/or a manager. While most of us have a portfolio holder, not all LAs do, so I am not sure that they would looked at by enforcement agencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bob Youel
Its a complicated subject so I suggest you read up on the parameters of becoming an MP/elected member to get a clearer view
Elected members have a great controlling mind effect especially with regards to H&S and Env areas. However because of their status I do not think that they can be easily [if at all] prosecuted re H&S / Env areas and in some ways I agree with this position. Noting that where there is a will there is always a way!
I am lead to believe that there is something brewing in the EU re elected members and the repercussions of their decisions and it happens outside the EU already where elected members are much more accountable than in the UK irrespective of their status
All that said, and after working with elected members I find that it is a much more difficult job than many think it is so before commenting one way or another i suggest that people get to grips with what they do and have to contend with and in my experience they usually have H&S to the fore
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Phil Rose
LB - I found the original advise (some years ago now) given by the employers organisation (below)not sure if it helps, but here it is.
Phil
Concerns have been raised regarding the role and responsibilities of elected
members, within the cabinet structure model, as to the liability of councillors as
individuals for health and safety offences. This matter has been the subject of
discussion with the Health and Safety Executive Local Authority forum. Current advice is that where the decision is that of the committee as a whole, portfolio holders within the cabinet may be considered to be more individually
accountable for decisions than a committee chair or committee member.
The HSE's solicitor advises that the fluidity of the decision making process in councils means that elected members make may decisions in advance of the committee process, which have health and safety implications. Where this occurs, it is recommended that the Council have systems in place to ensure that any decision is in line with the Council's own policies and procedures as they relate to health and safety. Elected members could be prosecuted under
Section 36 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, but this would be a matter for
the courts to decide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.