A serious Health and Safety review – or a political agenda?

Although Löftstedt recommends little change to legislation, is Cameron intent on “killing off the health and safety culture for good”? In November 2011 Professor Löftstedt concluded that “there was no case for radically altering H&S legislation, but that there were a number of other factors that drove businesses to go beyond what the regulations require, including civil action and the strict liability for damage and loss placed on employers.” “The problem lies less with the regulations themselves and more with the way they are interpreted and applied. Nevertheless, noting that the sheer mass of laws is a key concern for businesses, I recommend that the HSE undertakes and completes a programme to consolidate sector-specific regulations by April 2015.” Then on the 5th January the London Evening Standard published an article by Prime Minster, David Cameron entitled “British businesses battle every day against a tide of risk assessment forms and face the fear of being sued for massive sums.” Cameron went on to say that “the financial cost of this culture runs into the billions each year. Harder to calculate is the cost in terms of attitude: the way it saps personal responsibility and drains enterprise. So one of the Coalition's New Year resolutions is this: kill off the health and safety culture for good. I want 2012 to go down in history not just as Olympics year or Diamond Jubilee year, but the year we banished a lot of this pointless time-wasting from the economy and British life once and for all.” Powerful emotive stuff that makes great headlines. But what does it really mean for employers? It is 35 years since Lord Robens reviewed, reformed and significantly reduced H&S legislation. Subsequent expansion through EU directives has brought it under scrutiny again. However, with Cameron’s determination to “cut H&S law by 50% and to remove the H&S culture monster” it isn’t obvious whether this is a serious review, based on Löftstedt’s report, or a political and media driven agenda. The Professor concluded that there is no case for radically altering current legislation, but that there needs to be a risk-based approach to the law, and a better understanding of risk and amendments to the links between H&S law and civil claims. In reforming H&S law we cannot ignore the positive changes initiated by Robens, and the objective conclusions of Löftstedt. Whatever the outcome we have to ensure we maintain safe and healthy workplaces. Against this background of forthcoming change, employers should continue to:

• Comply with core H&S Legislation.
• Maintain a clear H&S Policy which outlines how the health, safety and welfare of employees will be protected.
• Have a risk based approach to protecting employees from intrinsic hazards in the workplace.
• Record and review risk assessments and tell employees about the measures in place to manage risks.