Posted By steve e ashton Raj: The SAC sounds rather like the Health and Safety Commission here in the UK. This body was established under our Health and Safety at Work etc Act in 1974, and has representatives from the enforcers, from business (business leaders etc) and from the unions. There are no places set aside on the Commission for H&S professionals (although one or two have been on the Commission via the business or union side appointment). This has been a bone of contention (with IOSH and others) for over thirty years, but the situation remains. You should also be aware that in the UK we do not have the same laws requiring appointment of specifically qualified people in certain circumstances. I am aware that in the Singapore Factories Act there is a requirement for organisations over a certain size, undertaking specified types of work, to appoint persons with specific qualifications. We have nothing so clear - there is a general duty for all employers to appoint a 'competent person' to assist in complying with H&S law - but the numbers of competent persons required, and the level of qualification needed, is not spelled out in detail (instead, the numbers must be 'adequate', they must have 'sufficient' time to do the safety tasks, and the persons must have ' sufficient training and experience or knowledge....') So in answer to your questions: 1. Should a Safety Advisory Committee be formed with the exculsion of Safety Practioners? - We may argue the case, but it actually seems to work reasonably well here in the UK. 2. Would a committee be steered towards achieving progress/production goals? - The involvement of Governement / enforcers on the Committee should ensure that targets and activities are focussed on areas of greatest need. 3. Would a committee place burden of work and responsibility on the Safety Practioners, so that responsibilty is not theirs to bear? This hasn't happened here in the UK - indeed, the European Directive that governs a lot of our law explicitly states that the employer cannot pass ultimate responsibility to the H&S advisors appointed. 4. Would this show that the Ministry does not have trust/belief in the knowledge, skills or expertise of Safety Practioners in Singapore? Not necessarily - although here in the UK, now that IOSH has gained Chartered staus, and individual members are to be given this - it may be that our competence and professionalism should gain more recognition within Govt circles. You should be aware we have been pursuing these issues for over thirty years, but mostly, what we have seems to work most of the time. Hope this helps to set your mind at rest a little. Steve.