I'm guessing that ( as with previous reports and articles) employers will be suggesting that the health and safety "burden" is not really that onerous in comparison to other legislative liabilities (employment law, finance and revenue, environmental).

Dear All

There is no surprise here. In the National Audit Office Business Survey report for 2010 they state:

'By specific area of law, businesses generally view Health and Safety compliance more positively, with significantly more agreeing with a number of the positive statements listed. No specific area of law surveyed is perceived as being any more burdensome than the average.'

They surveyed 2,000 organisations and reviewed Company Law, Employment Law, Health and Safety Law, Planning Law and Tax Law. The summary understates the position. Out of ten statements health and safety law was viewed the most positively [top] in 9 and joint top in the other.

There is no surprise because David Young found no 'burden' as a Minister in 1984 and 1986, despite his best efforts to find it. In the most comprehensive review of Health and Safety Legislation - published in 1994 - there was no evidence found. And no one else - apart from the Daily Mail - has found any evidence since.

The right wing 'think tank' Policy Exchange produced a report 'Health and Safety - Reducing the Burden' that was supposed to provide the facts about this so called 'burden'. It was such a load of tripe that it has proved impossible to get an answer out of the authors about the contents. It appears that having had it reviewed by people competent in health and safety the authors prefer to disown their own work.

That is why the Young Report targeted the wrong issues; identified the wrong solutions; and is applying the misguided solutions to mythical problems.

Just in my opinion, of course!

Cheers.

Nigel