Gordon Brown sees common sense

Health and Safety used as scapegoat

We have all seen the increasingly ridiculous media stories where normal activities are reported to have been curtailed because of “Health and Safety”. The inference is that Health and Safety policy is unreasonable at best or big brother at worst. Some examples:

• Christmas lights not being put up in case the people doing it fall off their ladders
• Pantomime actors not being allowed to throw sweets to children in case someone gets hurt
• Hanging baskets being banned in case they fall on a passer-by’s head
• Homemade cakes not being allowed at a fete in case they cause food poisoning
• Pupils being made to wear safety goggles if they want to play conkers
• Teachers told not to hand out plasters in case of allergic reactions

Those of us in the business know that the issue is not Health and Safety policy but the Management of Risk. Health and Safety legislation requires that risk assessments are undertaken before a job starts. Once the possible risks have been identified, an executive judgement should be made on the likelihood of any of those risks occurring and how to manage those risks. The outcome of a risk assessment is not supposed to be to eliminate all risks, no matter how unlikely.

The Risk and Regulation Advisory Council

Dubbed ‘the body for common sense’, the Risk and Regulation Advisory Council (RRAC) was conceived in January 2008 after Gordon Brown personally intervened to challenge the rise of the nation’s perception of a nanny culture. The aim is to educate the public that the Government is not responsible for every accident or piece of bad luck that befalls their citizens and that people need to take responsibility for themselves and recapture their sense of adventure.

Chaired by Rick Haythornthwaite, the new, independent Council has seven unpaid members, reported to have considerable experience in regulatory issues drawn from the public, private and third sectors, consumer groups and trades unions. The RRAC will take forward the UK's first ever work programme dedicated to understanding and promoting proportionate responses to public risk, particularly when faced with event-led pressure. The RRAC’s Terms of Reference are:

• Working with Ministers and senior civil servants to develop a better understanding of public risk, and how best to respond to it, through a series of workshops which consider both good and poor practice
• Working with external stakeholders to help foster a more considered approach to public risk and policy-making
• Ministers may also seek advice on particular issues from time to time.

Defensive labeling — such as the ‘may contain nuts’ warning on bags of peanuts — is one area in the RRAC’s sights as it believes such warnings are “laughable” and breed resentment. Also in line for scrutiny is whether the Government’s response to obesity is in proportion to the problem. The first project to be taken on by the RRAC will be a review of the frenzy of government initiatives to tackle the MRSA superbug to see if they are timely, proportionate and effective. Many healthcare experts are skeptical as to whether the most recent plan — a deep clean of all hospitals announced by Mr Brown last autumn — would do any good.