Equally, of course, it may make him more suited to the task. Look into history to find examples of where individuals have done a superb job even thought it may have appeared that they were the last person you would appoint. Most people consider that Lord Robens did a pretty good job on his enquiries that resulted in HASAWA being put on the book. Look at his vested interests and background to see that such matters are not as important in the outcomes or conclusions of such enquiries. Challenging his validity or competence at this point is, to me at least, less than charitable. I think we need to give him a chance; time enough to challenge the output when it is available. That is if it is the nonsense that a large proprotion of contributors to recent threads seem to be trying to suggest it will be, P48

I don't mean to be uncharitable. I do work in the insurance sector and we come across credit hire firms (such as Accident Exchange) all the time, with their vastly inflated claims, referral fees and ATE covers that the Jackson reforms are looking to abolish. You are right to draw the analogy with Roben, whose name at the time was synonymous with the worst H&S practices in the publics opinion. Of course, Roben was appointed by a Socialist govt, Young by a conservative (capitalist) coallition. It will be interesting to see what if anything he recommends in relation to the Jackson legal reforms.