Letter: Improvements to safety laws

Mr J. D. Rimington
Monday 22 November 1993 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: In a leading article on 15 November, you refer to proposals by the Government to replace large areas of safety regulation by a general duty of care that would undermine the basis of the Health and Safety at Work Act. Such an outcome would obviously be a matter of acute concern both to workers and to the public who are protected by it.

So far as I am aware, there are no such proposals, though ministers have made clear their wish for the removal of regulations that do not earn their keep in terms of the protection they confer; and I have been asked to report to the Health and Safety Commission with recommendations about that in March next. As leaked reports in the Independent on Sunday have disclosed, Lord Sainsbury is also making proposals to the same effect, which I expect soon to be discussing with the commission.

The Health and Safety at Work Act is itself largely a recapitulation of the civil duty of care in terms of criminal law. I know of no move to decriminalise health and safety law; the Government's intention, as I follow it, is to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of subsidiary legislation (and guidance) and therefore the effectiveness of its enforcement. Had it been otherwise, I doubt that the Health and Safety Commission would have made the proposals it did to carry out an examination itself of what it may be possible to do without reducing standards.

Yours faithfully,

J. D. RIMINGTON

Director General

Health and Safety Executive

London, W2

19 November

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in