Nowt wrong with what Chris Grayling says, you only have to look at http://www.hse.gov.uk/si...-health-safety/index.htm to see that any small business can do it themselves. I am a consultant and work for small businesses. When asked for safety policies, risk assessments etc. I always suggest they can do it for themselves but usually the comment is that they are "too busy" so I get on with it. I do what they want then talk them through what I have done to give them a chance to have a go. I don't think it's a myth but more like a true fact if people don't know where to look themselves. The only exception I make regards fire risk assessment where IMO you need to know more than the basics.

redken (not dalgleish I hope :-)) The problem I see with most small businesses is they are too busy getting work in the first place and then keeping the work that they don't see H&S as a priority, also some do not feel confident about staying compliant because they don't know what they need. I am always happy to assist and keep my fees low so as not to be too much of an expense, that way they come back to me for more. I always suggest they need me to fire risk assess and review and they seem to accept that. What was it Nanny McFee said - "when you need me but no longer want me I'll stay. When you want me but no longer need me I'll go" I think that's a good philosophy for a safety professional.

What a disgraceful load of tosh in this article. "Thousands of charity shops feared they would have to shut because they could not afford costly consultants’ fees to ensure they comply with health and safety rules." Really? Evidence please Minister. Who has asked "thousands of charity shops" about H&S Consultants? What questions were they asked? Is this in fact a made-up "statistic"? "There is nothing in the legislation to say that charities must hire expensive health and safety consultants to risk assess their charity shops." Biased much? What about cheap H&S Consultants? We aren't all driving round in Rollers living high on the hog as the Minister seems to think. "This is another example of the health and safety cowboys taking advantage of small organisations" I bet the Minister can't quote a single actual concrete example to support this. So yet another sweeping generalisation a la Lord Young? "All consultants are evil wicked money grabbers out to steal the profits from small business." (yes this is indeed a made-up quote but it looks good doesn't it? I bet it would get headlines! Luckily I can't say what I really think of this utter drivel and misrepresentation in this forum. However I might just pop off to my new blog and have a rant...

How quaint. People who think that government and press are separate. One feeds off the other. The press give the government what it wants to legislate against. In this case 'elf 'n safety. Following-on from the previous government, if you cannot remove the legislation remove the ability to enforce it. Don't forget, local government enforcement is also to be reduced. Never accuse government of being inept and stupid if you haven't considered devious and untrustworthy first.

No we don't John - that was part of the point...

Thanks to Philip for sharing the information with us. As others have said, the minister's comments seem to be arrant nonsense with no supporting evidence. Perhaps he thought he was writing an article for a Daily Wail type newspaper and hoping to give its readers a good fix of indignation based on their misperceptions of "elf an safety". As a slight digression, some charity shops contain notices telling people that no electrical items can be accepted as donations because of "health and safety requirements" or similar. By contrast it's refreshing to see that a fair proportion of other charity shops have notices advising customers that all electrical items shown for sale have been checked and tested as safe! The people running the shops or charities which refuse electrical items might have various reasons for doing so, e.g. can't be bothered with arranging or are unable to obtain the services of a suitably qualified person to do checks and tests, but shouldn't misuse "health and safety" as a label for refusing such items. Sometimes it's interesting to ask refusing shops what the alleged health and safety requirements are. Hopefully other curious forum users are polite when asking and always bear in mind that most charity shop workers are volunteers and didn't devise their shop or charity's policy about electrical items. On a positive note, can any forum users involved with charities which do accept electrical items briefly describe what arrangements such charities have for doing checks and tests? Most types of donated electrical items are likely to be double insulated, so the arrangements for checking and testing them are unlikely to be onerous or difficult. Perhaps some shops arrange for a local electrician or a retired one to visit for a short period each day or week - or even train and equip a suitably willing volunteer. On a wider note, does anyone know if there is any confederation or forum by which charities with shops can share information and advice about good practice for their shops, including health and safety aspects and electrical items, for the common benefit of such charities, their shop volunteers and customers, etc?

John J that shows how poorly some so called professionals act. It may have been a clone from another such document and it shows how many crooks there are in this business. If they are members of IOSH they should be reported and weeded out of the system because if they simply sell copies of other businesses documentation it means they are at best lazy and at worse criminal in thier behaviour.

There is nothing wrong with using a tried and tested method of stating something provided it is sound and free from over specification and does not contain obvious errors such as the wrong company name. If I found that to be the practice of a consultant he would soon be out of the door. I pay for sound advise that meets my personal requirements and to be faced with a clone of other work is an insult to me and a con at best. You pay for genuine stuff but stuf copied from others so blatently no thanks.