Yes, I read it and thought much the same. Most of the points they say "the majority agreed with the proposal so we'll go ahead", and then there's one glaring "the majority disagreed with the proposal, but we'll go ahead regardless".

It rather made a mockery of the consultation, I thought - where the consultation gives the answer we want, we'll proclaim it supports us, where it doesn't we'll say that consultation doesn't affect the plans.

Absolutely, ever heard of the term “voice of the customer” well if you have then this can be overridden by another term called “the voice of the boss (the one who signs your pay cheque)”

Also on page seven of the document reference is made to the Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 20000 ?????????????? bit premature as they won’t come into force for another 17,987 years.

Indeed what a useful exercise this is in the face of 12,000 + people dying from work induced ill-health each year. Consider this in the introduction of the Legionnaire’s Disease ACoP L8:

‘This publication replaces two separate documents: the 1995 Approved Code of Practice and the technical guidance, HSG70. This has allowed information to be consolidated, with the aim of making it easier to read and understand the duties under the law.’

That was in 2000. Now to make it easier for business to understand and comply with their duties, we can split them up again:

‘Consultation proposal: To revise Part 1 of this ACOP and remove Part 2 and make it separately available as revised technical guidance with both to be published by end-2013.’

Full steam ahead!! And this is progress, supposedly.

As regards the Management of Health and Safety at Work ACoP and majority opposition to a proposal, the HSE (Government) have form on this.

In CD 207 on improving worker involvement in 2006 the HSE recorded the following points in their analysis of the responses:

1 HSE question: On making a legal provision for employers to respond to safety representatives.

HSE response:

‘The majority (96%) of those who answered the question favoured a duty to respond, though again employers were less enthusiastic with 72% of those who answered agreeing.’

So with 96% of respondents and 72% of employer organisations in support, the HSE dropped any thought of assisting worker representatives through this proposal!

2 HSE question: On making legal provision for safety reps to be involved with risk assessment.

HSE response:

‘The vast majority of respondents (91% of those who answered) think this new duty would be useful. Of those, 82% also believed that our proposals were practical.’

Employer groups were opposed to it so – naturally – the HSE just dropped the proposal.

There is no substantial evidence that the Management ACoP needs to fundamentally change. And so the flawed, narrowly defined review of health and safety regulation lumbers on!!

Cheers.

Nigel

On another thread I've suggested the Mr Men series as an alternative to Ladybird Books, with some important qualification:

Just as Enid Blyton's Noddy Books have been 'corrected' since initial publication, so Mr Cameron has decreed (following the commissioning of separate reports that concluded that the opposite was the case) that in order to counteract the "claims culture" so prevalent in the UK several changes will be made to the Mr Men Series:

As a result of (no) consultation (whatsoever) the titles 'Mr Bump' ; 'Mr Clumsy'; 'Mr Wrong' and 'Mr Mischief' are to be immediately discontinued.
With immediate effect, these will be replaced by a simpler, consolidated single book: 'Little MissAdventure'.
Additional print runs of 'Mr Careful' and (of course) 'Mr Perfect' will become available in the next few months.

With apologies to Roger Hargreaves......................