THE COMMISSION
106. The Health and Safety Commission is one of the
few remaining bodies set up in the 1970s on a tripartite basis.
Witnesses told us that the tripartite structure was effective
and had brought many benefits for health and safety.[181]
The CBI, for example said "the tripartite approach ... has
worked extremely well. I think it is a success story".[182]
Certainly, we were impressed by the degree of consensus that appeared
to exist between the Commissioners from the CBI and the TUC when
they gave evidence (separately). This was also noted by the Minister
who told us: "I was impressed by the lack of partisanship
between, if you like, the two sides of the Commission".[183]
107. However, as noted above in paragraph 10, a number
of significant economic and labour market changes have occurred
since 1974. These not only present challenges for the way in which
the HSE executes its responsibilities, but also call into question
whether the current composition of HSC remains relevant. In the
light of this, witnesses called on the Commission to "look
at how it refreshes and regenerates its membership to reflect
those changes".[184]
Witnesses highlighted a number of groups of workers which, they
argued, are currently under-represented in the Commission, including
health workers; service sector workers;[185]
part-time workers;[186]
homeworkers;[187]
the self-employed; and workers in small firms.[188]
The role of industry in the Commission was also subject to criticism.
The London Hazards Centre told us that "the CBI has excessive
influence over domestic legislation" and that "the current
arrangements serve the interests of employers' organisations to
the detriment of working people".[189]
108. However, altering the composition of the Health
and Safety Commission to reflect economic changes and to address
concerns of under- and over-representation will not be easy. Witnesses
recognised that there were various barriers to doing this, primarily:
- the difficulty of enhancing the representation
of small firms. The Minister highlighted this problem in oral
evidence: "many of them [small firms] feel that they do not
have the time".[190]
- the need to be 'properly' representative. RoSPA
pointed out that "if people are going to play a properly
representative role and not just be there as individuals they
do need to ... be supported be a representative structure, to
be properly briefed, to be properly accountable to the constituencies
from which they come".[191]
109. The Commission is very much aware of the issue:
Mr Callaghan told us "I think the Commission has to reflect
... some of the changes we are seeing in the world of work ...
none of us 20 years ago would have predicted that some of the
largest factories now would be call centres or large retail supermarkets".[192]
But he defended the current mix of Commissioners, arguing that
the interests of large and small businesses were represented and
that, in any case, "it would be impossible for six people
to cover the gamut of industrial experience".[193]
110. Instead of addressing the composition of the
HSC itself, an alternative option may be for the Commission to
review the way its advisory committees are structured, with a
view to representing a wider range of interests.[194]
The Commission has 14 'advisory committees' and 7 'subject advisory
committees' which advise the HSC on policy development, act as
a sounding board for HSE proposals, provide a consultation mechanism
and produce guidance related to particular sectors or subjects.
Membership is drawn from relevant sectors, both sides of industry
and outside experts.
111. On balance, and in recognition of the key
role played by the tripartite structure, we believe that the composition
of the Commission should remain as it is. We do not believe that
enhanced representation of the self-employed or part-time workers,
for example, can be achieved within the Commission. Instead, these
groups of workers should consider joining a trade union or an
employers organisation if they wish to have greater influence
on policy. However, we recommend that the Commission review the
membership and structure of its advisory committees with a view
to updating them to reflect the current UK industrial structure.
In particular, we recommend that additional industry and subject
advisory committees are established to represent, at the very
least, the interests of small firms, part-time workers and the
service sector.
CONCLUSION
112. In conclusion, we believe that the HSE continues
to effectively discharge its statutory functions. We support its
overall approach and welcome many of its recent initiatives. However,
the context in which it is operating will become increasingly
difficult and it cannot afford to be complacent. We therefore
believe that various changes along the lines we have suggested
will need to be implemented. If these changes are made, we are
confident that the HSE will be able to continue to enforce a safe
and healthy working environment in the UK.
181 Q429-also
see HSE11, HSE16 and HSE24 Back
182 Q13 Back
183 Q426 Back
184 Q92-also
see Q63 Back
185 Q92 Back
186 HSE06 Back
187 HSE06 Back
188 Q429 Back
189 HSE15 Back
190 Q430 Back
191 Q92 Back
192 Q339 Back
193 Q341 Back
194 This
was put forward by RoSPA (Q92) Back
|
