Several days ago numerous national and regional newspapers published articles about Work and Pensions Minister Mike Penning writing to all local authorities and schools in England to urge a more common sense approach to health and safety in the light of various pronouncements by HSE's Mythbusters Panel. The articles commonly include information about the Panel plus examples of the topics which inspired the minister's letter. For an example see the Daily Mail's web article at http://www.dailymail.co....nkers.html#ixzz2zWfyH3KJ Some forum readers might be intrigued to see the phrases "Common sense at last" and "Health and safety" appear in the same heading above a Daily Mail article! Also, in true Daily Mail style, the article very helpfully includes large colour photographs of kids playing conkers, a baby chick, frilly socks and other subjects which relate to the topics covered by the Panel. :-) It can be quite interesting to skim through the reactive comments posted below media articles about health and safety. They can reflect a wide range of reactions and opinions. While some people take the opportunity to post derogatory comments about health and safety, others post sensible ones. One response which appeared below the Daily Mail article struck me as sensible and worth sharing on this forum: "Can you please report the truth about 'health and safety' stories in future. The reason schools ban conkers - or other seemingly ridiculous bans - is nothing to do with health and safety. It is to do with the threat of being sued. The problem lies in our litigious culture: ambulance-chasing lawyers and parents looking to sue to make a quick buck. The media tend to ignore this side of the argument completely and instead focus on a perceived "'elf n' safety" culture because it fits a political agenda that seeks to make government and bureaucracy seem pompous and ridiculous - which may well be true, but health and safety legislation has little to do with it. If people actually read health and safety legislation they would agree with almost 100% of it, no question, because it represents 'common sense' very accurately." Whoever wrote it might be someone who works in OS&H (or a related line of work) or perhaps a reasonably enlightened employee or line manager. p.s. I apologise to anyone offended by the multiple references above to the Daily Mail. Though I regard that newspaper with considerable disdain myself, my plea of defence is that the references were appropriate to the content of this thread!

When reading this I recall the comment, made more years ago than I care to remember by an editor of a then well known national newspaper: "Always remember, Chris, that the business of newspapers is not to bring you the news, but it is to sell newspapers." Whilst I treat the Daily Mail with a certain disdain, if we could persuade it that stories about health and safety that have either caused damage/injury/ill health or even death due to ignoring this or have actually saved lives due to good health and safety practice would actually encourage people to purchase said newspaper, then we might actually have some effect on the general population's view of what we do and why it is worthwhile. I do not believe the myth busting approach will do this. It is too defensive and negative. We need the hard-hitting stories that they would consider make good press and that they would therefore consider publishing. So come on folks. Let's start getting those stories out to these newspapers in the hope that they will get published. Chris