CRS welcomes the findings of the Löfstedt Review into UK health and safety

Corporate Risk Systems Limited (CRS) welcomes the findings of the Löfstedt Review into UK health and safety legislation which was published this week [Download full report HERE].  The review - called ‘Reclaiming health and safety for all: An independent review of health and safety regulation’ - confirms that the present legal framework for health and safety is broadly fit for purpose, but says that the challenge now is to embed a proportionate approach to accident and ill health prevention across the entire health and safety system.
The Löfstedt review was commissioned by the coalition Government in March 2011, following the recommendations in the earlier report ‘Common Sense Common Safety’ report by Lord Young published in October 2010 [View report HERE].  The review was led by Professor Ragnar Löfstedt of King’s College London, who was aided by an independent panel, and investigated opportunities for “reducing the burden of health and safety legislation on UK businesses while maintaining the progress made in improving health and safety outcomes”.
Professor Löfstedt has made recommendations aimed at reducing the burden of unnecessary regulation on businesses while maintaining Britain's health and safety performance, which is thought to be the best internationally. The Government has accepted in full his recommendations.
Stephen Asbury, Managing Director of CRS said: “I am pleased and relieved that Professor Löfstedt has rejected the mass deregulation recommended by some, and has confirmed that the present legal structure is broadly fit for purpose. His detailed recommendations for technical change show there is always scope for some tidying up of the law and eradicating unnecessary red tape without removing the essential protection for workers and the public that it provides.  But like the previous reviews of this subject, he has confirmed that not only has the UK got the regulatory balance about right but we also have much to be proud of.”
CRS fully supports the recommendations to reduce repetitive and clumsy regulatory requirements.  We are pleased that although the report points to the UK’s relatively good accident record, it also recognises the continued need for managing health and safety risks in the workplace. The report cites estimates that suggest the cost of injury and ill health to UK business alone could be just over £3billion, while the overall cost to society of workplace accidents and ill health has been estimated to be up to a jaw-dropping £20billion a year.
We welcome the report’s proposals for bringing local authority enforcement under the control of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and we’re also pleased that it identifies the very significant influence that third party “semi-regulators”, such as insurers, clients and funders, can have on duty holders. We believe the positive, helpful influence needs to be encouraged and the negative influence, which can increase bureaucracy unnecessarily, reduced. We also welcome the report’s recommendations to improve the understanding of ‘risk’.
CRS believes the proposed exemption from health and safety law of the self-employed “whose work does not impact on others” will need careful handling, as we do not wish to see an increase in serious injuries in this sector of our economy.
Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE, said: "Professor Löfstedt's insightful report will go a long way to refocusing health and safety in Great Britain on those things that matter - supporting those who want to do the right thing and reducing rates of work-related death, injury and ill health.  We must have a system of health and safety which enables employers to make sensible and proportionate decisions about managing genuine workplace risks.  Simplifying and streamlining the stock of regulations, focusing enforcement on higher risk businesses, clarifying requirements, and rebalancing the civil litigation system - these are all practical, positive steps.  Poor regulation - that which adds unnecessary bureaucracy with no real benefits - drives out confidence in good regulation.  We welcome these reforms because they are good for workers and employers but also for the significant contribution they will make to restoring the rightful reputation of real health and safety."
Stephen Asbury added: “We are delighted that Professor Löfstedt has emphasised the importance of a proportionate, risk-based approach to safety and health assurance rather than an inflexible one based on prescriptive rules. It is vital that this message is now embedded once and for all across the wider system, including in the activities of third parties, because there are many fresh opportunities for cutting harm and loss and making health and safety easier just waiting to be grasped.”
Professor Löfstedt accepts that more work is needed is in tackling the very real difficulties which some smaller firms seem to face in responding in a proportionate way to goal-setting duties informed by risk assessment.  It seems that SMEs are ‘making a meal of things’ or accepting ‘over-the-top’ advice uncritically, and this points to the need for such firms to get effective diagnosis and signposting so they can access the information, training and advice they need to manage their health and safety problems effectively. CRS recommends that firms use consultants on the official ‘OSHCR’ register of occupational safety and health consultants’ for proper advice and assistance, such as ours [View HERE].
Another Government regulatory reform initiative, the Red Tape Challenge, will report in the New Year on further possible changes to the stock of health and safety regulations.