“This is a genuine consultation, which will capture the views of people who are affected by health and safety regulations. We want to hear from all those with an interest, with the aim of simplifying health and safety and making it more effective and proportionate for the benefit of business and the workforce of Britain.”
 
Geoffrey Podger, HSE Chief Executive.

Geoffrey, wake up and smell the coffee!! This is not a 'genuine consultation' process but a politically engineered swipe at our industry in order to deflect from the real issues created by a recession.

No doubt the mods would take my post off if I put what I was thinking.


What a cop out that comment was.

The HSE should, IMHO, be challenging the Red Tape Farce at every opportunity. Most of the people I talk to, out of our industry, don't know what H&S is about. These people are not thick and slow, just uninformed. And then there is the rubbish from the Daily Mail.

I'd like to see the HSE have some backbone when it comes to things like this.

What a jolly way to start the day!!

Rant over

Andy

What a surprise politicians playing politics!

HSE may be "arms length" but at the end of the day they are still civil servants that have to dance to the masters fiddle, so I have some sympathy with Geoffrey.

I actually took some time to read so9me of the red tape challenge stuff the other day, and yes we have a sample of bonkers conkers comments on there, and while I did not do a proper count I would say most people are arguing in favour of health and safety being left alone, if not actually strengthened, and that its not a burden on business so more inspections not less should be made by enforcement officers. I wonder if this view will be reflected in the actual outcome.

Perhaps its about time the HSE was dissolved if they cannot do their job, if they are not fit for purpose why would you pay for a second rate service. Its about time we had a regulator who understood both the needs of employers and employees and put the safety of the workforce first. Playing politics with people lives when you sit in an ivory tower is not good and the civil servants need to be held accountable
Stephen

I wonder if this (most welcomed) review will also take into consideration the non reduction in workplace related deaths occurring and how a reduction in red tape can assist in such an exercise?

The Government have published no evidence that health and safety legislation is creating an 'unnecessary burden' on business. In this respect the Tories are continuing the approach they took in the 1980/90s when an even more detailed review of health and safety regulation costing - according to the GMB trade union - an estimated £250,000 took a year and a half to conclude:

'The evidence available is that this system of regulation is both relevant and needed. There is little evidence that, despite the costs of compliance, the system as a whole is unduly burdensome for business.'
Source: Review of Health and Safety Regulation: Main Report - HSC May 1994

For those who can recall the Review you will remember that each of the Sector Task Groups was headed up by a 'business person' as the Minister - Michael Forsyth - wanted business views to predominate. In the forward to the final report he was apparently 'pleased to see that the overall architecture and standards of legislation, which have enabled this country to achieve one of the best health and safety records in the world, are still supported by business.' Would you believe it!!

In the Young Report Common Safety Common Sense no evidence was offered to identify any cost/benefit analysis.

I suppose one of several key differences between then and now is that in 1994 the Government waited till after the Review was published before cutting HSE resources. This time they have cut HSE resources before the review even got off the ground.

Perhaps the Review will find some evidence of the 'unnecessary burden' that has eluded the Tories for so long. They have certainly been persistent in trying to find some.

Cheers.

Nigel

The cost of compliance is still lower than the cost of non-compliance - if caught.

Reducing the numbers of inspectors and relying on 'self policing' is, imho, futile.

A common thread running in all forums which discuss the cuts in services and funding, from the NHS to Armed forces - the country can't afford all that we were doing and must adjust. The politics come in when deciding where the cuts are to be applied, my choices would be different to many other peoples.

Buzz, I agree entirely. I work in the sector, and on Monday I sat in Preston crown court along with several of our executive managers to hear sentence passed on us. Low risk? Not if you're a fit and well young MP with no personal need for state supported care....

John

I'm reminded of Shrek in light of this year's fatalities; 'Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am prepared to make',

John

Hmmm.. Interesting. Someone told me that about agriculture too but when I was on the red tape challenge website, agriculture did appear to be listed. On the red tape web site, if you click on higher risk, there's a link to regulations and there do seem to be agriculture regs listed. Here's the link:

http://www.legislation.g...e=higher-risk-workplaces

Hello,

IOSH has been campaigning strongly for the existing health and safety legislation.
We think it’s the interpretation and application of the law, not the law itself, which is sometimes at fault.
And that has been our message to decision-makers and advisers in Government.
In correspondence to Government Ministers, to Prof Ragnar Lofstedt and the media, and in the House of Lords debate on the Police Reform Bill, IOSH has been heavily involved in the conversation on health and safety law.
Our chief executive, Rob Strange, has written to Business Secretary Vince Cable outlining our concerns, flagging up that health and safety supports enterprise, saves lives and sustains the economy, and highlighting the strengths of the HSW Act.
We have met face-to-face with Lord Young, Chris Grayling and Prof Lofstedt to make these arguments.
And we have used our own media channels – Connect, SHP’s Interface pages, Facebook and Twitter – to stimulate the debate.
It would be great to see more members involved in this consultation on legislation and seeing more representations from the health and safety profession in the Red Tape Challenge. Or they could join our discussion on Facebook, which has so far seen more than 50 people exchanging views.

Please follow the links below for our Facebook debate, Twitter and the Red Tape Challenge.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/IOSH/298074474009

http://www.redtapechalle...comment-page-1/#comments

http://twitter.com/#!/iosh_tweets

Regards,
Dr Luise Vassie
Executive Director of Policy, IOSH

If you read the regs in quesition, it's fairly obvious: the metrication regs update lots of stuff, including The Agriculture (First Aid) Regulations 1957, The Agriculture (Ladders) Regulations 1957 covering strength and performance of ladders, The Agriculture (Power Take-Off) Regulations 1957 and The Agriculture (Circular Saw) Regulations 1959 covering strengths, locations and clearances of guards and blades and stuff and so on.

I think provision and performance of guards on circular saws is a Health and Safety regulation.

achrn, yes, but presumably all they do is change LSD to kilonewtons or whatever. OK, I guess that might change some aspects of standards, but I do remain slightly puzzled,

John

As regards the guarding of a circular saw the metrication regs amended half an inch to 12mm - really big burden on business?

P

No, obviously not. It helps to flush out the people that are commenting without thought though - there's one posting that basically seems to be the full list of the documents for which they are seeking opinions and the chap has put 'revoke entirely' against most of them, including the metrication ones. Which presumably means either he's advocating that all circular saws in UK agriculture do return to imperial measurements (such as half inch guard clearance), or that he doesn't know what he's commenting about.