Steve He and Clegg are taking it in turns. P

Steve While it's reasonable to disagree with the Prime Minister, it's also the case that he's free to express his opinion. After all, if he is unwilling or unable to express joy at the corrections to his view clearly expressed in the report commissioned by his own government, he's in the position of a manager reluctant to accept the opinon of a world-class consultant commissioned by his own organisation. Surely a case for New Year tolerance and sympathy?

It seems the PM means to go on where he left off last year wanting to slay the 'monster' of Health and Safety. It has become his hobby horse and fits with his smug style. I wonder where he stands on public safety with all the recent shootings and knife crime such a common feature on the streets of britain. We will not hear him talk much about such serious issues because he simply brushes it under the carpet. I agree with stevie40 because all the nonsense the PM spouts about Health and Safety will eventually contribute to his downfall as most people can see using Health and Safety as smoke screen to hide the real reasone why UK Business is in deep trouble is utter rubbish.

Quote: "The number of existing health and safety regulations is to be cut in half by the end of the year and a cap imposed on the legal fees that can be charged on employer and public liability claims worth less than £25,000 to reduce costs and discourage vexatious claims". . . . . Sometimes we miss the point that is being made: part of his speech should be supported by IOSH

PS: Sometimes we just took a blank video tape into the courtroom - just the suggestion we had something on tape could make a plaintiff fold. Oh the good old days :-)

Absolutely. I'm looking to change my website advertising completely to some pictures of me fighting dragons and slaying the minotaur (or was it the other way round?)

Graham - would a disclaimer at the bottom do? "No monsters were harmed in the making of this website" I just listened to the Cameron clip and I don't see what all the fuss is about. Apart from the fact that he talked about "exemption for the self-employed" and didn't further qualify it, I pretty much agreed with what he said! His emphasis was on our litigious society and the fear this causes in small business. The monster quote has been taken rather out of context and it certainly isn't an attack on us. As someone said - at least he's keeping H&S in the headlines.

Heather - that's just brilliant!

I think that on this occasion you may also be wrong. If you look at the Guardian web-site http://www.guardian.co.u...y-monster?newsfeed=true, Richard Jones has already condemned the prime minister's remarks.

“All great things must first wear terrifying and monstrous masks in order to inscribe themselves on the hearts of humanity.” said Friedrich Nietszche. p48

Perhaps its just me but I can't help thinking that if the H&S culture is so wrong (and I am not agreeing that it is when properly applied) isn't the root cause that the initial Act was poorly drafted, that subsequent regulations were poorly drafted, which resulted in precedent setting judgements setting up the compensation culture, which led to the OTT H&S regimes and increased cost to industry? So my root cause is Politicians My underlying cause is the Judiciary/legal system My immediate cause is greed. Would I be cynical if I thought that a lot of politicians are involved in the legal system and that now the new cash cow is the Environmental legislation so they no longer need the H&S cash cow?

Well done IOSH for speaking out clearly against this latest tiresome generalised attack on our efforts to save lives and prevent long term health problems caused in the work place.

Beware a politician bearing gifts. Quit simply, under the guise of "removing regulation" and "ending the compensation culture" the right/s of the individual to use the courts to obtain redress for injury/ill-health are being slowly removed. Bearing in mind the amount of solicitors/lawyers/barristers "working" in political parties, parliament and the organisation of government, I very much doubt that the legal work will drop, although the ability of the individual to use the law for help may well disappear. Now, while this forum/organisation may well hope for the demise of the non-existent compensation culture, this organisation should consider the effect on both itself and the greater Health and Safety culture of the widespread removal of regulation (although since most is now rooted in EU directives and the government of the UK (subservient to that of the EU) cannot remove it before the EU has agreed) Now: Remind me again, how many people does industry kill, injure and/or make ill each and every year ? http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/at-a-glance.pdf And some are gloating over denying others the RIGHT to use the law to obtain compensation ? Define sadism to me ?

If he were a member of the public then i may be inclined to cut him some slack, but he's not, he's our 'ahem' elected leader and his personal views should be well and truly based on factual evidence. Ideally what needs to start happening is the government should be stating specifically what changes are required and how they will impact the current state of play. The time for bashing/complaining/smokescreen has finished and they need to demonstrate that the health and safety of the country's workforce is a vitasl part of their agenda.

Just think of all those Monster Regs courses which will suddenly appear, new ACOPs, Guidence and the changes required to the NEBOSH exam papers when this all comes in!

How interesting that a mythical monster can cause such concerns. This is, after all, just politics. He knows that the label is instantly recognised and a good tool to drive his governments agenda. Do any of us doubt that some change is needed? My favourite quote about politics is from Groucho Marks. ‘Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.’ That just about sums up any shade of politics and politicians for me. So, it is what HMG sees, it may be appalling to label it as such but at the end of the day what difference is that label really going to make to where we may be in a couple of years. This is politics and words in politics rarely translate into actions or real change. It is important then that IOSH continues the political lobbying to ensure that there is constant challenge but it is just a game. The real work is done in the lobby and back rooms and I am re-assured by the work that IOSH do in that arena. Stop for a moment and consider what could actually be changed and the degree of difficulty for each change. It should then be more obvious what the most likely outcomes of this monster mash will be within the timeframes of this current government. Then consider how long it would take the next socialist government to unpick it all again. It would be very dangerous to assume that any politcian is simply ignorant, ill informed or unintelligent Have a monster free weekend, p48 ;-)

...and full credit to you for taking that forward. However, what we have here is the PM effectively making a sweeping generalisation that he intends to "kill of health and safety culture for good". Whether this is taken in or out of context you cannot get away from the fact that this is an incredibly ill considered and dangerous statement to make that is both morally and ethically wrong. There's not even a hint that he's talking about 'elf and safety' or 'compensation culture', it's "...Health and Safety Culture..." (and how many of us are trying to promote something using those very same words?). Let me put it another way. If we worked in an industry where the CEO stood in front the workforce and said the same thing we'd be horrified and wondering where that left us standing. There's little difference here, it's catering to those who want to make fast £££££'s whilst also stating that it doesn't matter what the expense is. There is a great deal of clarification required here as to what the statement actually means, if it does indeed mean anything.

It appears that is not just this government which is blaming regulation for all the country's woes as history repeats itself when during the 1980s recession President Ronald Reagan 'made clear from the outset his views that government regulation was a leading cause of the nation's problems - a drag on the nation's economy in general and the development of its rich natural resources in particular.' Deep water - The Gulf Oil Disaster and Future of Offshore Drilling. Be careful what you wish for...

It doesn’t matter which Government is in power. Fact: If some businesses claim wrongly that “elf n safety” is stopping them from working then that equates to a “VOTES BANDWAGON.” Any politician will jump on that if they think that there are votes in it for them. Chill out, relax and you will see that nothing significant will change. Give the MP's time and they will find something else to moan about, after all they are due another pay-rise.

I just wonder if on this occasion if the PM has gone in with an electronic tablet of pre-prepared (speech) answers, only to discover that speech writer was completely unaware of the outcome of the Loftstedt report and current Government policy. In my experience is that politicians tend to be very assertive with their new ideas and tend to be much quieter and defensive at discussing these when they are in the middle of the development of complex policy and legislation. Monster is a surprising phrase to use at this stage which why I suspect that the wrong speech was used. If you look at the Conservative Party website, what is reported is very different to other press accounts of this aspect of the speech and the word monster is not even mentioned! http://www.conservatives..._measures_announced.aspx