|
Immediate
Release
HSC to Treasury: "No reduction in inspection
levels"
The Health and Safety Commission have told the
Treasury's Hampton review on 'Regulatory Inspection
and Enforcement' that it does not consider it appropriate
to reduce the number of 'inspections' and concentrate
more on advice and awareness-raising.
In
its response to the Hampton Review's Interim report
- which the CCA obtained through a Freedom of Information
Act Request - the HSC says that "
"Your
interim report makes reference in places to shifting
the balance from inspection to awareness and advice.
Consideration of this balance is certainly a crucial
regulatory issue. We have given it much thought
and believe we have the balance about right."
The
Health and Safety Executive adds in its response that
at any increase in providing advice should not be
at "the cost of resource for enforcement activity."
The
CCA is making HSC/'s response available on the day
that the Treasury is publishing the full Hampton Report
HSC's
response to Hampton is important in the context of
the controversy that erupted last year over the publication
of HSC's new Strategy "2010 and beyond" that suggested
that the HSC was moving towards "new ways of
securing compliance voluntarily."
David
Bergman, Director of the Centre for Corporate Accountability
said:
"It
is certainly important that the HSC stand firm against
any attempt by the Treasury to decrease the level
of inspection and investigation. Whilst making information
and advice available to businesses is important,
HSC's own research evidence clearly shows that the threat of enforcement
is a crucial motivating factor for most companies
- and without inspection and investigations the
threat of enforcement action is not available.
In
relation to the question of whether regulatory bodies
should be merged, the HSC said in its response to
Hampton although it is "open in principle to
considering structural reform", it "remains
to be convinced" of the advantages of of a "wider
labour inspectorate. It goes onto say that:
"There
would certainly be disadvantages about spreading
the net beyond those bodies concerned with protection
of workers to include those whose responsibilities
include taking action against individual workers,
such as over illegal working. Beyond that, we consider
that mergers with major bodies, such as [Environment
Agency] or [Food Safety Agency], would create organisations
that were too large without sufficient synergy."
It
also goes onto say:
"We
would be keen to maintain separation from economic
regulation and bodies responsible for business sponsorship."
The
Health and Safety Executive's response also states
that
| • |
It
does not think that Regulators can make a 100%
commitment not to prosecute businesses who have
followed simple guidance, except in the most serious
cases - as suggested by Hampton |
| • |
Supports
"any moves that would "make penalties
quicker and tougher" |
| • |
Cannot
see merit in "on-the-spot fines and would
need some convincing as to their effectiveness". |
| • |
It
is commissioning forensic accountants to provide
guidance for the courts to use when considering
company wealth. |
| • |
It
is considering systems of restorative justice. |
The
Centre for Corporate Accountability is a human rights
charity advising those bereaved from work-related
deaths, and working on issues of safety, law enforcement
and corporate accountability.
|
