Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60
- 69)
TUESDAY 26 OCTOBER 1999
MR MALCOLM
DAVISON, MR
ROGER ALESBURY
AND MR
REX SYMONS
60. Could you maybe explain just what you mean
by that; is it competent to be able to carry on the business of
your firm, or competent to be able to—
(Mr Davison) We expect them to be both competent to
carry on the business of the firm, but if they are acting in a
health and safety capacity, be it safety representative, specialist,
they need the knowledge to be able to do that, so they can give
advice on health and safety matters to the people whom they represent,
but also that they can, if necessary, I was going to say "argue",
but discuss, with supervision and management, the things that
need to be discussed, and so they can contribute at the health
and safety committees, they are speaking from knowledge.
61. Is there, within either of your companies,
a system where, if an individual sees something that is dangerous
and believes or perceives that it is possible that there would
be some threat to his livelihood by reporting it, he, or she,
can actually do a report anonymously, to bring something to their
attention?
(Mr Davison) We have been looking, over the last several
years, at how we can encourage people to report things that they
see are wrong, whether they have done them themselves, or they
were done by others, or created by the company; so we are looking
both at reporting minor injuries but also near misses and dangerous
situations, trying to create, and we have talked about, a "blame-free"
culture, which is a difficult concept, but we are actively encouraging
that in all of our locations. And I would not like to think that
people felt that their livelihood was at risk from reporting a
dangerous situation.
62. I wonder if the people in the North Sea
felt that their livelihood was at risk?
(Mr Davison) I cannot speak for that.
(Mr Alesbury) I can only speak for BP Amoco, but certainly
within BP Amoco we would adopt a similar approach and we would
encourage anyone who saw anything that they felt was a health
and safety issue to report it. And, certainly, again, there is
a "no blame" culture; in fact, we commend people for
doing that, for reporting near misses and reporting issues that
are health and safety.
Mr Brake
63. Mr Symons, you said earlier that you felt
that the tripartite approach was very successful, but you are
one of the Commissioners so, presumably, we would be surprised
if you said anything else. Can you see any way in which, in fact,
the composition of the HSE should be changed, perhaps to reflect
different working patterns?
(Mr Symons) I think the opportunity has been taken
already to make use of the three other members, and we have a
public interest member now, the first one was Dame Rachel Waterhouse,
and we now have the third, and these people, the public interest
members, have made a huge contribution, I think. The whole question
of the social partnership clearly has to reflect society, otherwise
it cannot be the social partnership; but, in order to contribute
to these debates, you need a great deal of feedback and you also
need the briefing that goes with it, so the TUC and the CBI and
the local authorities have briefing systems which help the Commission
to understand what is needed in the workplace, which supports
the whole of the consultative process. I think it is very difficult
to move to a situation where people meet together without briefing
and with no particular background in the subject, because these
are very complicated issues, sometimes; if you take the last asbestos
issue, this was extremely complicated and required a great deal
of input.
64. Obviously, we would expect the Commission
to be briefed, but are you receiving briefings from organisations
that represent part-time workers, for instance?
(Mr Symons) Insofar as employers feeding the system
have part-time workers, yes.
65. Homeworkers?
(Mr Symons) Insofar as homeworkers, we have a new
Commission member, Mr Abdul Chowdry, who I think is almost an
expert in part-time and home workers in the Midlands.
66. So you feel that you are currently adequately
representing those ranges of interest?
(Mr Symons) Efforts are being made, Chairman, to improve
it; it can always be improved, of course.
67. On a different subject; in your evidence,
you have said that, and I will quote: "the CBI does not think
it would be appropriate in all cases to have open meetings, if
they would inhibit full and frank discussion." Do you think
that having open Commission meetings, board meetings, would inhibit
full and frank discussion?
(Mr Symons) I am not sure whether I am the best person
to answer that, Chairman, because I am a member of the Commission,
but I will answer it and perhaps my colleagues will contribute.
The Commission currently meets once a fortnight, approximately,
and makes decisions at most meetings about legislative packages
or about consultative documents. It has developed a technique
of working to consensus, and, in all the time I have been there,
there has never been a vote. In order to reach consensus, you
have to have a free debate, and the Commission does not now record
individuals' statements, it only records the decision. I think
it would be quite difficult for every meeting to be open to the
public; however, I think there would be great advantages in meeting
in public from time to time, so that people could see the way
the system worked.
68. Could you just explain in what way having
an open meeting would inhibit reaching a consensus?
(Mr Symons) Because the papers, the legislative packages,
can be extremely complicated. We all receive briefs on specific
technical points, maybe on the wording of one paragraph, and if
we have to make these decisions looking over our shoulder at who
is listening to every statement made then I think it is a very
different scenario from the scenario that is reflected now. At
the moment, almost all the papers are public and everything is
on the Internet, and those parts that are not public are specifically
marked; so the information is available before the meeting to
anyone who wishes to make a submission. It is perhaps a topic
that the Committee will wish to bring up again when it talks to
the Executive; because the decisions on these matters, of course,
are not down to the Commission alone.
69. You may be aware that the Environment Agency
have their board meetings in public. I am sure that they discuss
complex matters, and they seem to be able to handle it. So I hope
you will take this message back, that it is something the Commission
should consider?
(Mr Symons) I am sure it could be handled. I would
simply say that it has not been the practice so far.
Chairman: On that note, can I say thank you
very much indeed; we are running out of time. Thank you.
|
