Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
mikecarr  
#1 Posted : 24 September 2010 08:10:15(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mikecarr

http://www.telegraph.co....bodies-under-review.html no mention of the HSE or anything H&S related so that's a good sign maybe??
johnmurray  
#2 Posted : 24 September 2010 08:46:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

Have a "row" through the list. The full list of bodies to be "de-quangoed" (!) Many have some medical relevance of some sort. In any case, speaking as a cynic, many of the staff are already working for other agencies/departments so they'll just go back to their "day" jobs.
Clairel  
#3 Posted : 24 September 2010 08:48:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Clairel

I was suprised to hear on the radio that they may be axing the Health Protection Agency and British Waterways.
johnmurray  
#4 Posted : 24 September 2010 08:52:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

Reading on, down the list:
Quote:
Public bodies to be privatised (4 bodies) Construction and Skills Training Board Engineering Construction Industry
Murray18822  
#5 Posted : 24 September 2010 10:55:53(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Murray18822

Might it not be that many of their functions can already be carried out by existing and accountable bodies.
Paul3B  
#6 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:10:35(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Paul3B

If you have a look at the BBC website there is a link to a document that suggest a decision regarding axing of the HSE is still to be taken: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/...9_10_bbcnewsquangos3.pdf Have a look at p. 13 of the pdf. Paul
Clairel  
#7 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:14:58(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Clairel

ooohh errr.... it does doesn't it!!!! Surely they would have to replace it with something though? We have requirements to enforce our legislation under the EU don't we? And wouldn't abolishing the HSE mean repealing the HSWA?
mikecarr  
#8 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:36:55(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mikecarr

I don't know how they can abolish the HSE and still maintain the HSWA. It's a recipe for disaster.
anagram  
#9 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:37:38(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
anagram

Clairel wrote:
I was suprised to hear on the radio that they may be axing the Health Protection Agency and British Waterways.
The HPA's 'functions' are supposed to be transferred to the new Public Health Service (details of which still awaited !). This is not new news - it first came out in July or so.....nevertheless, hardly any public/worker consultation on any of this...
anagram  
#10 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:38:57(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
anagram

Clairel wrote:
ooohh errr.... it does doesn't it!!!! Surely they would have to replace it with something though? We have requirements to enforce our legislation under the EU don't we? And wouldn't abolishing the HSE mean repealing the HSWA?
Wait for Lord Young !!!
anagram  
#11 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:40:05(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
anagram

Did anyone see the SACGM listed in the quango list ?
Murray18822  
#12 Posted : 24 September 2010 14:41:11(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Murray18822

Think the HSE exists because of the HSWA! Don't see any reason to revoke the act when the functions of the HSE (and other Quangos) can be merged into existing government bodies. Reading down the list it makes interesting reading - who could possible justify some of them.
jay  
#13 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:04:39(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jay

The proliferation of quangos started long before 1997 when labour came into power, but there is no doubt that the existence of some does raise eye-brows and there has been a huge proliferation. Having said that, the current structure and arms length situation of the HSE originates from the Robens Report, hence HASAWA and in large HSE is described, even by govt audit reports and several reviews since the 1990's as being well run and effective such that it has been held as an example for others to follow. Obviously, the decision cannot be published in advance of the Lord Young report!
A Kurdziel  
#14 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:16:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

They don’t need to repeal the whole of the Health and Safety at Work Act only the bits they don’t want for example the HSC was merged into the HSE a few years ago. The beauty of the HSE is that it is independent of any department and so can for example go after a government department without any fear that some politician will tell it what it should or should not do. If it just becomes an agency of a government department then it will be less impartial and less transparent.
barnaby  
#15 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:36:06(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

The head of admin at the place I worked told me me with glee that they were getting rid of all quangos and as the HSE was a quango that meant I might be surplus to requirements! I scoffed. Does this mean he might be proved right.
barnaby  
#16 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:37:02(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Sorry should have added that was in the first months of the Thatcher Government.
barnaby  
#17 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:43:31(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Some of the EC machinations prior to the Directive would be interesting, too, though I wouldn't know where to find them on t'interweb. Some political pressures which weren't always based on the risks. Perhaps a FOI request to HSE?
barnaby  
#18 Posted : 24 September 2010 15:44:14(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Whoops wrong thread!
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
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.