Proposals for CDM regulations launched
Proposals to revise the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM Regulations) are being launched today.
The launch will be followed by a 10-week consultation period when the construction industry can respond to the proposals.
Richard Habgood, president of the Association for Project Safety, said: “we have waited a long time for these proposals to be issued. We hope that the new CDM regulations will being a marked improvement in construction health and safety risk management performance by all dutyholders across the board but in particular to the smaller and medium-sized projects.”
The proposals for the CDM regulations are expected to bring about the creation of a new dutyholder — the principal designer — who will be responsible for the coordination of health and safety throughout the design phase. The new role would substantially replace that of the CDM co-ordinator.
In addition, many domestic projects will now come under the full effect of the CDM regulations in order to better comply with the European Directive.
Proposals for CDM regulations launched
Proposals to revise the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM Regulations) are being launched today.
Safety & Health Practitioner
SHP - Health and Safety News, Legislation, PPE, CPD and Resources Related Topics
New cladding fire risk identified and could be “tip of iceberg”
Company fined £450k and director and site manager sentenced following death of labourer
Huge step towards inclusive PPE as industry body promises to ensure provision
A good idea in bringing in a new duty holder namely the Principal Designer. Over the past twenty years we have seen a Plannng Supervisor and CDM Coordinator and quite personally some of the CDM Coordinators I have come across do not really comprehend their duties. Over the last four years I have operated within three major constrction sites and a maor rail contract London where the client decided that they wanted to be a Principal Contracor and CDM Coordinator. Two of the CDM Coordinators did not fully comprehend the extent of their duties. The rail CDM Coordinator was an… Read more »
look back 19 years to the first CDM regs, consider the culture of H&S and the compliance, particularly with smaller contractors and clients, the planning supervisor was the catalyst for change and drove the culture forward as they were often de facto safety inspectors and pointed out errors on sites and advised on compliance. would the rise in site safety have happened without CDMc or PS ? new SME and smaller contractors will quickly slip back into old ways and the HSE will not even be aware of the sites with the new F10 rules. very depressing unless something changes… Read more »
I agree with the previous comments and would like to add this. The consultation document includes an impact assessment part of which indicates the cost savings that are likely to be made by removal of the CDMC. Does this mean that the HSE think that Architects (Principal Designer) will be carrying out the CDMC role for no fees? I feel this is unlikely to happen. Either they will increase their fees dramatically (not to mention their insurance premiums will skyrocket) or they will only pay lip service to the role. Removal of the CDMC whose sole role is to ensure… Read more »
I am at a loss to comprehend the logic behind the proposed revisions to the CDM Regulations. Let us look at two of the HSE’s stated policy objectives behind the revisions: 1 Maintain or improve worker protection, 2 Improve Health and Safety Standards on Smaller Construction Sites. How do you then begin to place these noble thoughts in the same basket as raising the bar when CDM applies to 20 people on site?? The government spent taxpayers money on the Loftstedt Report which demonstrated that CDM in its current format is working well apart from over emphasis on pre qualification… Read more »
I agree with P Moxham in that these proposals to amend the CDM Regs again will be a step backwards. Plan, Do, CHECK and ACT that’s all we want with the agreement of UK Construction Companies and not politicians or EU representatives.
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and the CDM regulations both apply to construction sites. They both apply fire safety to those sites with a considerable overlap between the two separate enactments. In the interests of better regulation would it not be better to remove overlaps so that only one enactment applies fire safety measures to a premises? This would ease the burden on compliance as there would then be no need to carry out risk assessments under both pieces of legislation which should be happening now and probably isn’t.
I fully agree with the comments made above. P Moxton – I am also at a total loss to comprehend the logic. Frank Hayes – We are CDMCs and totally agree that so many others have no real understanding of their duties, the importance of the competence currently required to be one, and the value it can bring to a role, thus de-valuing it. Perhaps the lack of understanding of the HSE’s current Regs is what should be addressed here, enforcement rather than confusion. We also work as H&S Consultants who mainly assist construction SMEs – I can assure you… Read more »