The deputy prime minister wants small businesses to be subject to no more than two inspections a year by all regulators.
Speaking to small-business leaders in Shoreditch, east London today (25 October), Nick Clegg said the HSE, the Environment Agency and other regulators must understand that their roles are to make the lives of small businesses easier, not harder.
He told the audience that the country needs small firms to grow and insisted that “a culture change” among regulators is paramount if this is to happen. He said: “So, there will be a major shake-up of business inspection, going through the regulators, asking: ‘are they still necessary?’, ‘should they still exist?”
“Making sure that, yes, they intervene when necessary, they offer advice and support but, otherwise, they let you get on with it. They will need to respect the Regulator’s Compliance Code, which says regulators must think about and encourage economic growth, and they will have to make sure they aren’t breathing down your necks.”
He went on to say that the Government would seek to impose a cap on the number of inspections that regulators can conduct on any one small company. “Why, for example, should regulators be able to turn up at your door whenever they want, and as often as they want?” asked the deputy prime minister. “Why can’t we limit the number of inspections to, say, two a year, ensuring these bodies coordinate among themselves to stick within that limit?”
Adding that some regulators may even be scrapped, he said: “Which body does what can be extremely unclear, so we’re minimising the number of authorities you will have to deal with in the future; introducing sunset clauses for new regulators; placing them under rolling review.
“If they become irrelevant, or their functions are replicated elsewhere, they’ll go.”
Mr Clegg stressed that some regulation is “hugely important for business” but acknowledged reports that the typical small-business owner spends around a day a week complying with regulation instead of bringing in new business.
Responding to the speech, the TUC pointed out that a new survey of SMEs by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) suggests that employment law and health and safety regulation do not even feature in their list of concerns.
Said Brendan Barber, TUC general secretary: “Regulation is there to protect us all from businesses that rip us off, trash our environment, and risk our health – or even our lives. However, it is only of use if it is enforced. Enforcement should not be seen as a burden on business, but instead a way of ensuring that good businesses are not undercut by cowboys who disregard the law and cut corners, whether it is on paying VAT, or not polluting our rivers.
“Cuts in enforcement will put even more of us at risk of damaged health, or injury, or death in our workplaces.”
The Hazards Campaign bluntly accused Mr Clegg of talking “utter cobblers”, adding: “Not only is it cobblers, it is dangerous, toxic, life-threatening cobblers. This is yet another assault launched by the Tories on laws and enforcement that protect workers, now with clear support from the Lib Dems.”
IOSH also took issue with the deputy prime minister’s suggestion that health and safety regulation adds to the burden of small businesses, and stressed that unannounced health and inspections must be allowed to continue. Its head of policy and public affairs, Richard Jones, said: “Good health and safety isn’t ‘red tape’ – it saves lives, supports enterprise and sustains the economy. The Government must ensure standards of public and worker protection will be maintained, before considering further cuts to health and safety inspections.
“It’s important to remember that, sometimes, health and safety inspectors may need to make unannounced visits following serious complaints, concerns, or incidents in order to ensure people’s safety is not being put at risk. This must not, under any circumstances, be impeded.”
He added: “Mr Clegg also needs to recognise that research shows many businesses actually welcome proactive inspections, as they provide free, high-quality, practical advice and support.”
The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) said it would like to see inspections booked in advance, as it allows businesses to have the right people on site and get the most out of the inspection. However, it also fears the HSE’s cost-recovery proposals could harm the existing relationship between small businesses and the regulator.
FSB chair John Walker said: “We support moves by the HSE in taking a more proportionate risk-based approach to inspections. However, we would not want to have good working relationships between business and inspectors potentially undermined through the high flat-rate fees proposed under fee for intervention. Businesses want to be compliant and sometimes need help and support to do this. They should feel able to approach the HSE for advice and not be fearful of large fees.”
Here we go agan!! It’s ‘elf an Safety’ wot’s to blame for everything!! – I for one am sick to death of reading the verbal manure that this idiot spouts in his continuing efforts to gain votes for his retrograde policies that are completley out of touch with facts.
The main fact being that he obviously thinks that the people that will get hurt as a result of this won’t be the ones that vote for him.
The HSE’s role isn’t to make SME’s go bankrupt! That’s Cleggs role! Well, if it isn’t, he’s made excellent progress so far, so he may as well get the credit for it!!!
I agree wholeheartedly with Brendan Barbers comments, enough said!
I realise that unannounced inspections required to catch out companies that flout the law. I completely agree that this should if anything be stepped up at a time when some companies will treat H&S as a corner to be cut.
If HSE inspect and find nothing seriously wrong, they shouldn’t re-inspect since they can class that company as a low risk.
If they find serious failings, they should repeatedly visit until the company complies with the law.
Too often compliant SMEs are needlessly revisited
The examples you give are not ‘regulation’ – at least not at national level. No new regulations of this nature have emerged since 1993, apart from fire & CDM. People – including some safety practitioners – manage to make guidance, best practice, general improvement measures etc. into ‘new regulations’. Sure, some detail here & there may change, but the general demands don’t. Offices get bogged down in trivia because they decide to. Maybe it makes them feel they are doing something important.
mr. clegg needs to realise that small businessess need the regulators more than the larger ones, the regulators announced or otherwise offer help and guidance and are not there to crack whips and punish at the drop of a hat. where would these people be without proper regular guidance, bankrupt through heavy fines, in prison, their families in ruin because theyve lost everything, or is MR.Clegg going to take responsibility for the consequencies…i dont think so.
Well Done Clegg!
A little bit of H&S moderation & less bureaucratic for our SME’s. Looking at some of the comments below, I can see how out of touch & biased the contributors are.
I have a business employing forty persons in a medium risk environment with factory based manufacturing & field based installations. I am the only Director and spend about a day a week on Government bureaucracy. We’re a responsible employer with reasonable H&S policies & procedures. We’ve had no significant accid
Yes we don’t need health & Safety anymore! and lets get rid of workers just cuz there face doesn’t fit and why we’re at it lets remove all the fences from Downing Street, and the Ministers bullet-proof cars We don’t need the HSE, What right has anybody who is not a Tory to be in work! Why not bring chimneys back we can send all those rioters up them to clean them….me cynical!!!!!
I have been involved in H&S for about 20 years now, the only HSE inspection I have ever seen was one that I asked for in a company who refused to take it seriously – and then they missed one of my crucial concerns.
Inspections are irrelevant! – Well they would be in Downing Street they wouldn’t want to be checked would they!!
Once again H & S is used as an excuse for economic failure. Would Nick Clegg be happy to have fly-tippers dumping rubbish on his lawn?
Given the reductions in the HSE budget most SME’s will be unlikely to get a visit yearly from any inspector let alone two a year.
Being one for plain speaking, I agree fully with the sentiments of the Hazards Campaign.
Clegg needs to wake up and realise that H&S is a key part of the business world and if his Civil Servants bothered to do their research properly and looked at the H&S stats within the EU, its clear to see we do a damn good job of enforcement in this country.
Maybe thats the reason for this latest rediculous outburst, is he suggesting we are doing so well that we can take our foot off the pedal? What an idiot!!
Agree, totally with IOSH view. Their needs to be a campain to communicate to small businesses that Health and Safety makes good sense and can be simple to follow with the right advice!
I have worked for my current employer for just over three years and in that time we have had only one inspection from the HSE our buisness is manufacturing and employs 60 people and is a medium risk business. Statements like this are typical of the current goverment that obviously do not research these subjects enoeugh before going public
Unbelievable – once again Clegg in another effort to appease his tory masters stoops to even lower depths. Demonstrating just how out of touch he is with the real world. Even prior to the draconian cuts by the coalition the liklihood of SME’s being visited was remote to say the least. Now a clear signal is being sent to unscrupulous employers that its now easier to injure or harm your employees / polute the environment.
late response to Steve who owns small business. You don’t understand health and safety or its purpose otherwise you wouldn’t make that comment and be happy about Clegg’s statement. Oh thats right, you are the owner of the business therefore it is ok to think of safety as burden. It isn’t. If you are of medium risk, there is a risk something could go wrong and the first thing they will ask for is your risk assessment, H&S policy and training records. bare that in mind.
This is a warning to Mr Clegg and the other members of the anti safety brigade,
When death and serious accidents numbers start to rise in small to medium businesses,
And families suffer needless pain.
I will write to the government and say I told you so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unfortunately this government is in a mess with public sector jobs disappearing like snow in the sun and the surprise surprise the private sector not taking up the slack. Removing regulation might be a jolly wheeze to allow small employers who often have poor employment standards to take on the unemployed. No risk of regulation, inspection or monitoring, treat ’em like dirt and get away with it. Welcome to Cameron and Clegg’s Britain of 2012 – what a wonderful world!!
Two instances of individuals posting on this thread who cannot tell the difference between ‘their’ and ‘there’. Come on guys (and girls) lets try not make us H&S professionals look thick.
In my experience, inspection visits by HSE to SME’s are quite rare, so 2 per year would be extraordinary. But the assertion that SME’s do NOT find H & S regulations a burden is absolutely untrue. Ignoring those companies in my immediate sector, involved in chemical processing, & who are (& have been for many years) beset on every side by more & more safety regulation, even office-based companies get bogged down dealing with childish issues such as stress & training on lifting trivial weights.
When there’s economic problems, politicians look to blame minorities. In 1930’s Germany it was Jews. UK politicians, supported by most of the media, it’s Health & Safety. On the odd occassions when all the ills of the world aren’t the fault of H&S, it’s either: immigrants; single mothers; travellers; or the BBC. The fiscal disaster we face couldn’t possibly have anything to do with irresponsible bankers, hedge funds, venture capitalists, weak financial regulation and greed could it? God forbid!
how many SME actally do get unanoucned visits for no reason? Not many I bet
What an alarming statement by the deputy prime minister, why on earth should any small buisnesess be treated any different.
This would mean that as an employee of a medium size buisness my liveliehood could be put at risk because a controlling governement has different rules, so the small buisness does not need to worry about its employees health & safety and this will in turn reduce its costs so they are able to undercut others.
The laws must apply to ALL. Come on Mr Clegg get a grip.
Why worry about regulators if there is nothing to worry about. In most cases, these regulators offer sound and more importantly, FREE advice on aspects that may eventually, save lives. I have never heard of any business complaining about too many inspections.
This is just another case of a politician pandering to his audience.
I agree entirely with Brendan Barber. Once again this government is showing just how out of touch with reality they are.
Had clegg actually bothered to do any research he would have found that most SMEs do not class enforcement inspections or indeed Health and Safety as a burden at all. Is it not better for good SME’s if cowboy companies with no intention of complying with the law are inspected and highlighted? The race to the bottom has well and truly started.
Ah, the smokescreen thickens with yet more reason why H&S is the cause of the country’s (nay, the world’s) woes.
It’s getting harder and harder to stomach this endless serving of tripe from London.
Funny that the government are effectively saying that it’s ok to cut H&S regulation but nothing in relation to environmental regulation, which in many cases is even more stringent.
Hurt the workforce ok? Hurt the environment not ok?
I’ve had enough of these ignorant sound bites from Cameron, Clegg, Young, and Greyling. It’s about time they took responsibility and accountability for the state of the economy. They’ve been in power now for 17 months. How long are they going to keep blaming everything on scapegoats who don’t have the ear of the tabloids such as Health and Safety. It’s a form of bullying in my opinion.
Personally, I see nothing childish about addressing the two risks that according to the HSE cause the largest amounts of work-related sickness absence in the country – stress and manual handling.
Risks come in many forms – acute injury, chronic/cummulative health effects, risks that cause pain, death or financial loss as in sickness absence and staff replacement. I don’t think it is helpful to start dismissing one major risk and validating others – even in white collar environments.
Once again this shows how frighteningly out of touch some leading politicians are with the real world. The vast majority of small businesses would be lucky to get one visit in five years unless of course serious issues were discovered. However sometimes it is lack of understanding by SME’s. I recently spoke to a small garage owner who was complaining about a H&S visit but it quickly became clear that he had had a visit from VOSA because he does MOT’s. Lots of work still to be done.
The Tories persistent claims that H&S is damaging business is very misguided and Clegg’s view that inspections should be limited to 2 per year is laughable. We have not seen a HSE inspector for 7 years and have no prospect of a visit any time soon. We value HSE inspector visits and regularly ring the HSE for advice. It is a shame that the HSE will now be charging for their time as this will only serve to alienate businesses.
Complex and unnecessary employment law is damaging business.
U’mm two inspections a year! That’ll make a change; in all my years as an Occupational Health, Safety and Environmental Manager I’ve never had a regulator tip up to view my domain and / or support my cause. Come on Clegg get down off the ‘band wagon’, careful don’t slip and fall.
Politicians like Clegg are very good at telling people what they want to hear, more so when invited to a particular cause and have a captured audience. That said, for some small businesses working in building, engineering and construction there many regulations with which to comply.
aud, I think you forgot the WAH, Vibration, Noise and Asbestos Regulations since 1993.
Martin, you are mising the point – politicians never let the facts get in the way promoting their cause. Where there’s a gain, there’s someone to blame.
I do hope I have correctly spelt my ‘their’ and ‘there’ – I may not sleep tonight for worrying.
Steve, I wouln’t mind betting that you do not spend a day a week on health and safety. It may be other ‘Government bureaucracy’ which takes up your time, like HMRC, HR, etc.
Don’t pretend that health and safety is such a burden because as a consultant for many SMEs I know it is not. Indeed, many only require a visit once a year to review policies and RAs – job done. The exception is for those working in high risk industries like construction, which is more onerous.
If this is the route the government want to take, they should change the education curriculum so that all young people leave school with at least the basic health and safety certificate and a first aid certificate – at least then they will be aware of what their employers should be doing. A higher level educational qualification (A levels/degree) should require a higher level H&S qualification before they leave education.
I for the lifeof me cant understand that the Goverment gets mixed up in a subject they seem to understand very little of. As a practicing HSE Specialist in UAE I would welcome Inspections on Project sites by HSE bodies other than myself and my team. Second pair of eyes always a added benefit. I will say HSE keep up the good work.
There are two points that Mr Clegg seems to have missed. Firstly any SME that receives just one regulatory visit in a year should think itself lucky, with the reduction in inspections by the HSE.
Secondly, it is big businesses not small ones, that have become overburdened with regulatory visits, despite a policy of ‘informed’ busineses receiving less visits but more ‘support’. The prime criteria sometimes seems to be the proximity to a HSE regional HQ, offering a ‘day out’ at a large plant.