The campaign for the return of common sense in the application of health, safety and environmental rules has made its way across the pond, with the announcement by Barack Obama that he is to get rid of regulations that are “just plain dumb”.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal yesterday (18 January) the US president pledged to “root out” laws that have “gotten out of balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business – burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs”.
To this end, Mr Obama has signed an executive order, which, he says, makes clear the need to strike a balance between freedom of commerce and applying rules that are necessary to protect the public from threats to their health and safety.
The order stipulates a government-wide review of existing legislation to remove outdated regulations, which, according to the president, “stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive”. Citing his own ‘conkers bonkers’ type example, Mr Obama criticised the US Environmental Protection Agency’s insistence that the artificial sweetener saccharin be treated as a dangerous chemical, saying: “If it goes in your coffee, it is not hazardous waste.”
According to reports in the American press, the announcement is widely seen as a move to appease the business lobby and conservative groups, which have accused President Obama of being anti-business. The ‘Tea Party’ movement of conservative Republicans has been actively campaigning against the EPA’s efforts to tackle climate change, while the US Chamber of Commerce has previously called for a halt to what it sees as “a move from a government of the people to a government of the regulators” under the Obama administration.
In a statement released after the WSJ piece, the US Chamber said: “Congress should reclaim some of the authority it has delegated to the agencies and implement effective checks and balances on agency power.”
However, liberal groups were scathing of the move. In a blog post on Obama’s piece, Rena Stenzor, president of the Center for Progressive Reform, suggested he was acting with one eye on the 2012 election. Recalling the 11 workers who died in the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the 29 who lost their lives in a coalmine collapse in West Virginia, both last April and “on Obama’s watch”, she said: “The families, friends, and co-workers of these victims of under-regulation and under-enforcement might conclude that the United States is reverting to a place where the government most definitely does not protect people who cannot protect themselves.”
As for those who believe the argument that lighter-touch regulation is needed to create jobs, Ms Stenzor concluded: “They just serve up the assertion, in part to distract us from the hard reality that it was deregulatory fervor that got us into this mess in the first place.”
The government is already consulting business leaders on which regulations they find most onerous, while regulatory agencies have been directed to do more to account for and reduce the burdens on small businesses “to make sure nothing stands in their way”.
In 2009, the most recent year for which full statistics are available, 4340 Americans died at work.
This looks like the begining of a race to the bottom. Who can have the slackest H&S laws?
For a long time I have found many health and safety rules and regulations stupid or anoying. Plastic Hats inside finished building or in shopping centres with the public milling arround, ear defenders where little or no
noise is generated and it may be more important to hear accutely. Employers should provide as safe a working environment as possible with suitable clothing etc but not force such devices on people where there is no need. Freedom is one of the most important aspects of life.
The US’s approach of fining people until they comply and endless standards to meet with little guidance is fundamentally flawed, as evidenced in the number of fatailities and injuries. The US need to start taking a lead from the UK’s ‘reasonably practicable’ approach that I know Americans don’t understand, as the OSHA and EPA’s approaches have been so prescripted and regimented for so long.
artificial sweetener saccharin be treated as a dangerous chemical, saying: “If it goes in your coffee, it is not hazardous waste? In large quanities, is this not hazardous to the environment?Why do people that know little about health and safety get involved and try to stop people that do know about it??? I think Lord young’s report is extremely damaging to the workplace health and safety culture.-clearly now, world wide. PROMIOTING POOR SAFETY STANDARDS.
With 4340 deaths at work in 2009 and they want to cut H&S??
The American H&S regulations are woeful and as Mike has pointed out they as a country have an extremely poor safety record to begin with, so deregulation is clearly a bad idea.
Obama hasnt exactly endeared himself to the electorate and I doubt he will be president for much longer, but I don’t see how he feels that an attack on workers rights is going to help his campaign? As we have found in this country though, business leaders will decide what happens, not the people in the know
Coffee – add milk. Place large quantity of milk in a natural water course. Result a dead stream.
– caffeine. Classified as harmfull to health when in a concentrated format and for good reason.
Having worked in 10 states of the USA over the 6 years, the “normal” standards applied are very different and enforcement of regulations is very patchy. A visit by the regulator is often about them finding the quickest easiest way to issue a citation before departing.