Accordiong to the press as part of tomorrows Queens speech - there is a proposal to remove the self employed from H&S legislation. As a starter - where would a site having both employed and self employed working along side each other stand? Apart from very carefully!

I seem to recall that this was part of the Lofstedt Report recommendation...but only if it is a low risk activity. Of course, it has escaped the notice of the Professor that there are few duties imposed on the self-employed, and of those, low risk activities would not apply anyway.

And who decides if a work activity poses a potential risk of harm? or are we just going to have a blanket guess that certain industries re low risk anyway like house -building or tree surgeons?

#4: Peter - absolutely. Removing Regulations few businesses have heard of; that were not being applied; out of date and basically forgotten about. No 'burden' before they were revoked no 'burden' lifted afterwards. Now add self-employed exemption. No problem to start with - Lofstedt did not find a 'burden' on the self-employed - and now we will introduce legislation to exempt the self-employed who are not a risk to others. I'm quite looking forward to seeing the final statutory instrument that brings this into place. Given all the self-employed people who now work in such a wide range of different occupational sectors, the criteria for establishing those to whom the law still applies to and those whom will be exempt, will - no doubt - be clear, simple and easy to understand. As J K Rowling was once quoted as an example of a self-employed person who did not constitute a risk to others, perhaps she could be requested to provide a magician to figure it out. Indeed this could provide a complementry approach to the mythical 'burden' being lifted by the revocation of regulations that no longer apply! All in the name of reducing the so called 'burden' of 'red tape': a Red Tape Fallacy indeed! Cheers. NigelB