Polictical posturing. What the UK can do unilaterally is very limited if we don't wish to fall foul of EC Courts.

The thing that will I think cause most problems is cost recovery. HSE inspectors will be obliged to make money out of any visits they make. We are told that businesses that get a clean bill of health will not be charged but I suspect that means inspectors will be expected to go digging for breaches (no matter how minor) to generate income.
I have been told that the current HSE policy is only to prosecute for real breaches not just technical ones- the HSE would only prosecute for failure to produce a ‘suitable and sufficient risk assessment’ if that leads to an actual or likely injury. Now, the temptation might be to say ‘Sorry your risk assessments are no good and here’s an improvement notice and an invoice for £1000’.
So instead of a ‘common sense approach’ to H&S which we currently have, it will be full of the sort of nitpicking that Lord Young was promising to get rid of.
The Law of Unforeseen Consequences

“IOSH welcomes moves to drive out any rogues from health and safety consultancy – and has been calling for Government support on this for some years. We’re pleased to have been involved in the development of OSHCR and to see it go live today.

More hyperbole! No mention of the mechanisms proposed to achieve this objective.

I despair at IOSH!

Jon

Stevel

Just for information the trade unions have been behind the most successful worker involvement initiative this country has ever seen. The introduction of the trade union Safety Reps position in law in 1978 meant that huge amounts of trade union resources were - and still are - put into worker orientated preventative health and safety. As it is generally workers that are killed, maimed and made ill by work, trade unions have always been trying to get better protection for workers - it is not a new discovery.

The success of the trade unions in this field has led the HSE to include worker involvement as one of three key priorities in supporting their 10 point strategy Be part of the Solution. They are looking to replicate the success of trade unions in the non-union organisations.

In the last 33 years I cannot recall regular weekly mass walkouts in support of health and safety issues by trade unions. However I do recall the various deregulation efforts of previous Tory administrations of which this one is just the latest. My understanding of the trade union movement's position is that it wants the laws on prevention and consultation with workers to be applied and not ignored - like the 60% of employers that the HSE estimate do not consult with their employees, for example - which is of course, illegal.

Dear All

It is difficult to see how we could go back to pre-1974 HSAW Act days, as much of the heavy industry, coal mining etc and the corporate 'model' on which Robens based his recommendations has virtually disappeared. However there is no indication in the simple health and safety guides; 33% cuts in HSE inspections; 35% cuts in HSE resources of what is going to be done about occupational health problems in the so called 'low risk' sectors so beloved of David Young in his 'we've never had it so good' days.

The Government review starts from the wrong premise about business 'burdens'. If it started with a review about how businesses could be helped to reduce the risk of injuries and ill health and improve their business efficiency, it might create some interest. However it is a political exercise based on newspaper reports so that if something meaningful results, it will more likely to be by accident than design.

Will the review address the real issues in health and safety? - unlikely. However one can hope. It does give us the chance - again - to focus on our successes though.

Interesting times ahead, no doubt.

Cheers.

Nigel

Section 1 of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 provides the power to" reduce or remove burdens". No doubt its application will extend to Health and Safety Reform.

And IOSH are supporting this initiative?


Jon

I think that the IOSH response has been measured-refer to:-

http://www.iosh.co.uk/ne...4_chris_grayling_mp.aspx

Not only that but IOSH did have concerns about the previous , i.e Lord Young report

http://www.iosh.co.uk/ne..._in_uncertain_times.aspx

http://www.iosh.co.uk/ne...osh_in_lords_debate.aspx

"Cowboy Consultants doing inspections". Oh dear, is this the best Grayling can utter?

Regulatory inspections are the preserve of the HSE. Has the noble Lord Young not briefed him?

I would hope that IOSH will step up to the plate and show a bit more metal in engagement rather than a tacit approval of the brutal plans than has hitherto been the case.

I feel as if I want to rejoin and support a trades union action in opposing these proposals.

J

I imagine that the response of the insurance industry, who will, at the end of the day be covering the 'risk' of poorly maintained H&S will be to drastically increase premiums and requirements.

Thus stifling somewhat the entrepenerial spirit and stifling some businesses.

Whether IOSH say anything against the "cuts" or not will depend upon whether they get a piece of the action.
Morals or money ?
Hard choice.

Hey!
Some areas of work, and many employers, never bother about health and safety here, never mind Saudi.