House of Commons - Work and Pensions

Select Committee on Work and Pensions Fourth Report

2 BACKGROUND

8. The twin bases of the health and safety system in Great Britain are the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) and regulations enacted under the Act, often pursuant to the European Union's health and safety directives. Legislative responsibility for Health and Safety is reserved to the UK Parliament, while responsibility for policy areas such as health and education is devolved to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly. HSE's structure has developed to enable it to work with the devolved institutions.[5] Northern Ireland has its own Health and Safety Executive and separate legislation. The HSWA imposes duties on a range of people and organisations. It takes a 'goal setting' rather than a 'prescriptive' approach. Regulations can be supported with Approved Codes of Practice (ACOP) that advise how employers can comply with law. Failure to comply with an ACOP can be taken into account during criminal and civil proceedings as evidence of failure to comply with the legislation.

9. The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)[6] were established by the HSWA. HSC is composed of between six and nine members, appointed by the Secretary of State following consultation, advertisement and open competition.[7] HSC's role is to advise Ministers on health and safety issues, including proposals for new legislation and standards. The HSE assists and advises the Commission and has statutory responsibility to make adequate arrangements for the enforcement of the Act and other relevant statutory provisions. About 80% of the HSC/E budget is provided by the DWP, and about 20% is raised through charges.

10. Health and safety law is mainly enforced by HSE. Local Authorities are largely responsible for premises such as offices, shops, retail and wholesale distribution centres, leisure, hotel and catering premises.[8] Some other discrete areas, such as aviation, are dealt with by other bodies (see Chapter 11).

11. Injury levels have fallen significantly since the introduction of the HSWA. For example, as HSC/E pointed out in their written evidence, while there were 651 fatal injuries to employees in production and some service industries in 1974, the comparable figure for 2002/03 was 182, a reduction of over 70%[9], at a time when the workforce has expanded by 12%.[10] And Great Britain's record compares well on an international basis. Looking at the annual rate of workplace fatalities, Great Britain has the second lowest rate, at 1.7 per 100,000 workers, compared with the EU average of 2.8. Sweden has the lowest rate.[11] Nonetheless, the statistics make disturbing reading. In 2002/03, excluding road accidents, 226 workers were fatally injured, there were 28,426 reported major injuries and 126,004 reported over-three-day injuries.[12] The average rate of injuries to workers reportable under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) was estimated to be 1,510 per 100,000 in 2001-02. The estimate for the level of reporting for non-fatal injury under RIDDOR based on the Labour Force Survey is 41.3%.[13] The incidence of self-reported work-related ill health prevalence in Great Britain stood at 2.3 million people in 2001/02, accounting for 33 million working days lost.[14]

12. In 1999 the Government announced a strategic reappraisal of the UK's health and safety framework, resulting in the publication of its Revitalising Health and Safety Strategy Statement in June 2000.[15] The aims of this were to

inject new impetus into the health and safety agenda;
identify new approaches to reduce further rates of accidents and ill health from work;
ensure this country's approach remains relevant to the changing world of work over the next 25 years; and
gain maximum benefit from links between occupational health and safety and other Government programmes.

Ambitious targets were set to reduce working days lost, reduce the incidence of fatal and major injury accidents and reduce rates of work-related ill health (see Chapter 4). These targets were underpinned by a strategy statement and an action plan consisting of 44 action points. HSC/E have recently published a paper detailing the current position, achievements and next steps relating to the 44 action points.[16] Some witnesses to the inquiry argued that effective implementation of these action points is what is needed.[17]

13. Shortly after the publication of Revitalising, the Government produced its occupational health strategy, Securing Health Together: A long-term occupational health strategy for England, Scotland and Wales. The aims of this were to reduce ill health of workers and the public caused or made worse by work, help people who have been ill to return to work and use the work environment to help people maintain health. Targets were set, for example, to achieve a 20% reduction in the incidence of work-related ill-health by 2010.[18]

14. By 2003, HSC/E considered it to be 'clear that more had to be done'.[19] It therefore undertook another consultation exercise and, in February 2004, published its Strategy for Workplace Health and Safety to 2010 and Beyond.[20] The main themes in this are a) developing and working in close partnerships; b) focusing on those interventions that have the greatest impact; c) rising to the challenge of occupational health and d) promoting the benefits of health and safety.[21] Key points arising from these themes are:

The need to target limited resources where they can have greatest impact.
A 'downplaying' of further regulatory solutions, although HSC continues to press for higher fines, a new law on corporate killing and the removal of crown immunity.
The need to forge greater strategic partnerships, especially with those who can stimulate action by others.
The need to win 'hearts and minds', through effective communication and demonstration of the business and moral case for health and safety.
Recognition of local authorities as key strategic partners, both in their enforcement role and as employers.
Continuance of enforcement as a key tool and one that has underpinned success to date.

15. Sponsorship of HSC/E has rested with a number of Government Departments since 1974. It transferred to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) from the Department for Local Government and the Regions in 2002.[22] HSC/E's work on health and safety fits well with DWP's own agenda of keeping people in work and rehabilitation for getting people back to work. The need for joined-up policy on these issues, particularly between HSE's work to promote health and safety standards and DWP's work on rehabilitation, was highlighted by a number of witnesses to the inquiry[23]. And as DWP point out, a number of other government departments have an interest in the specific activities of HSC/E.

16. A further question is how HSE fits into the overall regulatory framework. In Budget 2004, the Chancellor announced that he had asked Philip Hampton, former finance director of Lloyds TSB, BT and British Gas[24], to consider with business, regulators, and in consultation with the Better Regulation Task Force, the scope for promoting more efficient approaches to regulatory inspection and enforcement while continuing to deliver excellent regulatory outcomes.[25] The Budget document noted that:

Independent Regulators,

17. A paper entitled Becoming a Modern Regulator was discussed at a meeting of the Health and Safety Commission on 6 April 2004.[26] This states that the 'regulatory framework in the UK has grown up over centuries in a piecemeal fashion' and that as a result, the overarching architecture 'lacks a coherent and consistent style…the canvass is inconsistent and overcrowded.'

18. The document notes that there are over 100 independent regulators and that 'greater brigading would harmonise approaches, reduce burdens on business and avoid duplication and might be a logical step forward.' It argued that a 'one stop shop' argument was 'probably unachievable' given 'the enormity of the task and the differing needs and wishes of stakeholders.' It was recognised that there was limited joint agenda-setting and planning but HSE was said to be exploring how this could be done more effectively. The minutes of the meeting at which the paper was discussed note that 'it was believed that the government had a desire to consolidate regulators.'[27]

19. The Hampton Review put out a call for submissions from business on 23 June 2004 (with a deadline of 15 September).[28] This stated that the Review Team was 'particularly keen to hear from businesses that have significant concerns about the ways in which inspection and enforcement regimes operate, and also any ideas for beneficial changes that could be introduced.' Questions posed include:

which regulators the business has dealings with (for example, HSE, Environment Agency, Food Standards Agency, Local Authorities);
whether businesses would prefer to have visits from a generalist inspector who could draw in specialist expertise as required;
whether regulators are sufficiently tough in cracking down on poor performers;
whether good practice is recognised sufficiently;
whether the regulator takes sufficient account of risk and past performance in deciding where to focus resources;
whether the regulator acts consistently; and
whether it provides a useful source of advice and guidance.

20. Spending Review 2004 will also have implications for HSE:

A new target was set to improve health and safety outcomes by 2008 through progressive improvement in the control of risks in the workplace.[29]
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is to report on a review of the management of long-term sickness absence in the public sector by autumn 2004.[30]
DWP is to 'realise total annual efficiency gains of at least £960 million by 2007-08.' As part of this, by 2007/08, DWP will reduce its workforce by 30,000, redeploy 10,000 posts to front-line roles and reduce its administration budget in real terms by 3.0 per cent per year.[31]

We recommend that in the context of Spending Review 2004 the HSE inspectorate be recognised as a front-line service and protected.

5 Volume III (No. 36) Back

6 These bodies are closely linked and are often referred to in this report as HSC/E Back

7 Volume III (No. 36) Back

8 HSC (2002), The health and safety system in Great Britain, Sudbury: HSE Books Back

9 Volume III (No. 36) Back

10 National Statistics, series DYDC, workforce jobs seasonally adjusted. Back

11 Volume III (No. 36). HSC points out that care needs to be taken in comparing figures for different countries. Figures are for 2000. Back

12 HSC, Health and Safety Statistics Highlight 2002/03, Sudbury: HSE Books Back

13 HSC, Health and Safety Statistics Highlight 2002/03, Sudbury: HSE Books. NB. The National Audit Office (in NAO (2004), Improving Health and Safety in the Construction Industry. HC 531. London: The Stationery Office) says HSE has estimated from surveys that employers only report around 46% of reportable non-fatal injuries and the self-employed report less than 5%. Back

14 HSC, Health and Safety Statistics Highlight 2002/03, Sudbury: HSE Back

15 HSC (2000), Revitalising Health and Safety Strategy Statement. June 2000. London: DETR Back