HSE: De-regulation or revitalisation

pdf version (what's that?)

The UK's safety police, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), has reached a fork in the road to its future.

Earlier this year the HSE's ruling body, the Health and Safety Commission (HSC), set a policy which follows a more business friendly de-regulatory path of less law enforcement of workplace safety laws and more advice and encouragement (see 'Sold out' below). But in July a government select committee in the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) published its report on the HSC's and HSE's work saying the current path was the wrong one and more enforcement, not less, with more resources is what is needed. The DWP report recommends the government and HSE get back on track with the government's 'Revitalising health and safety' strategy which it published after wide consultation in 2000. The 'Revitalising' proposals called for a new safety bill dealing with crown immunity, increased penalties for safety crimes including imprisonment, rules covering all company directors etc.

Which argument will win out in the long term is the question being asked currently as the parliamentary committee has no power to force change, it can only make recommendations. The DWP can and should insist on changes following the line of the report. However, in the opposing corner, the chair of the HSC and person in overall control of the HSC/E, Bill Callaghan, has made it clear he does not see their recommendations as the way forward and will resist some if not most of the key findings such as extending safety reps' rights, a key finding of the DWP report.

HSC

The HSC under Callaghan's steerage has also failed to push the government's 'Revitalising' legislative agenda since its publication, focusing on trying to meet some fairly weak targets on accident and ill-health reduction which it openly admits it is unlikely to achieve. Callaghan was appointed chair of the HSC by government as a trade union appointee from the TUC, but has yet to show any real sympathy towards a trade union agenda for change. Much of the government's own 'Revitalising' strategy has been agreed at various union conferences and the TUC Congress but this has not been reflected to any real extent in HSC or HSE policy or action.

Callaghan has openly stated he is against extending safety reps' rights in law and in particular the right to issue Provisional Improvement Notices (PINs). Again this flies in the face of what the DWP, TUC and many others, say about roving safety reps and PINs. The DWP report states: 'Given the HSE's limited resources, if safety representatives were empowered to enforce health and safety law in the workplace, we believe this would have a powerful effect in improving standards. We also believe this power to take action should include not just criminal prosecutions but also improvement and prohibition notices.'

De-regulation

De-regulation of health and safety laws can occur in many ways, the most straight forward being removing the legal force of safety laws and making them advisory, as was tried in the early 1990's. A sneakier way of de-regulating, which gives the impression of maintaining enforcement, might include restricting the activity and effectiveness of an enforcement agency by cutting or limiting its budget, weakening its guiding policy and then implementing it. And that is what's happening now as the combined effect of cuts in funding to HSE, shifts in policy by the HSC, changes to HSE enforcement policy and the potential shrinking even further of the role of HSE enforcement officers. The Centre for Corporate Accountability has analysed the policy and budgets of HSC/E and published its worrying findings on its web site (see below). The legality of some of the de-regulatory changes made by HSE recently is questionable, such as 'earned autonomy' i.e. letting 'better performing' companies off HSE enforcement activity.

Inspections

Current estimates are that workplaces are likely to see an HSE inspector once every 15-20 years, if at all. In April 2003 the trade union Prospect, one of the main unions for HSE workers, warned that cuts to HSE's budget would mean a reduction of around 50 inspectors out of about 700 field inspectors employed nationally. Prospect

estimated this would mean at least 5,000 fewer workplace inspections per year. A year later the HSC finally admitted that cuts were having to be made and that with 698 inspectors employed in 2003, recruitment would stop and those leaving employment would not be replaced. Prospect fears that with retirement and inspectors leaving their jobs the number of inspectors lost might be higher than 100, worse than previously thought.

The DWP report calls for a doubling of field inspectors. This flies in the face of the current HSC/E policy statement which doesn't call for more resources and which edges field inspectors' (our safety police force) increasingly away from inspections and enforcement. This is cutting back on the one thing the DWP report says is effective: 'inspection, backed by enforcement, is most effective in motivating duty holders to comply with their responsibilities under health and safety law.' The DWP committee calls for HSC to change its current strategy (HSC: A strategy for workplace health and safety in Great Britain to 2010 and beyond, see references) to reflect that.

There is a pilot scheme in London and the north-west where new 'workplace compliance officers' are currently being tried out. Without the same amount of training or powers as HSE inspectors they are meant to assist them in their work and provide guidance to employers. Prospect is concerned these new officers will lead to a further watering down of site inspections and enforcement. Others believe money spent on these new officers could be spent on much needed fully qualified enforcement officers, especially in areas such as construction. The role of inspectors is also being undermined by restricting inspections to 'priority areas' and ignoring the rest and not investigating some major injuries.

Silent witness?

You would have thought that any opportunity to counter this very worrying outlook would be grasped with both hands, but no ! Chair of HSC Bill Callaghan and HSE's Director General Tim Walker were called to give evidence to the DWP inquiry into health and safety in May. They were asked what might be done to improve their lot by the chair of the committee, Sir Archie Kirkwood. There was no substantial answer given by either man. Again the chair tried to coax an answer, implying if anyone was going to be able to help argue for funds it was this committee. Again there was no strong case put for more funds, just a comment that strong applications had been made to ministers. The committee report expressly criticises HSC/E for not having any response on the question of extra resources.

An act of folly? Unlikely. What is more likely is that these two men are simply implementing a planned de-regulatory programme for the HSE. The evidence for this is in the HSC strategy document published in February 2004 which has provoked angry outcry since its publication (see 'Sold out' and 'HSC strategy' below).

Which route the HSC/E takes now depends on who will win the debates that are currently being held. But with Bill Callaghan's recent re-appointment as HSC's Chair it looks unlikely the DWP's agenda will be adopted unless pressure is brought to bear.

References:

• Department of Work and Pensions Committee report: The work of the Health and Safety Commission and Executive: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmworpen/456/45602.htm
• 'Sold out' on HSC policy, Hazards magazine: www.hazards.org/commissionimpossible/report.htm
• HSC: A strategy for workplace health and safety in Great Britain to 2010 and beyond www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/hsc/strategy.htm
• Centre for Corporate Accountability: www.corporateaccountability.org
• Revitalising health and safety: www.hse.gov.uk/revitalising/strategy.pdf

top of page

Resources page