![PP Construction Safety logo and link to home page [1]](http://www.ppconstructionsafety.com/wp-content/themes/ppcs960/images/ppcslogo.jpg)
Minor oversights have potential to destroy company and HSE relationships
The manufacturers organisation EEF has warned that proposals to charge for the recovery of costs associated with breaches safety law may damage relations between HSE and manufacturers.
The EEF point out that responsible companies making ”minor oversights” could be treated in the same manner as those who have “behaved irresponsibly” and face the same level of cost recovery. EEF urges the government to wait until the recommendations of the Lofstedt Review of Health & Safety are published before setting out firm proposals.
Test for recovery should be based on “enforcement”
The manufacturers’ organisation believes any cost recovery system should only apply where the ‘material breach’ leads to an improvement or prohibition notice or, where as a result of a visit or investigation legal proceedings are implemented to deliver a “clear division between chargeable and non-chargeable interventions”.
EEF head of health & safety policy, Terry Woolmer, said:
“Manufacturers will support the clear principle of intervention where there is a ‘material’ breach of the law and that those who fail to manage health and safety responsibly should pay a form of cost recovery. But they also believe that enforcement should be targeted towards those who do not manage significant risks.
As it stands the proposals are not sufficiently objective and transparent in differentiating between those failing to manage health and safety and those who are acting responsibly, but have made some oversights. Failure to strike this clear balance in any implementation of cost recovery may damage relations between the regulator and Business.”