Live consultations
Here's a list of the documents we'd
like your comments on.
If you'd like your comments and opinions to be considered for
inclusion in the IOSH response to any of the documents below,
please send them to our Consultations Team.
Consultation documents feed
Subscribe to our consultation documents feed and you'll have
alerts sent straight to your desktop whenever a new document is
available for comment. For more information and details of how to
subscribe, visit the about news feeds
page.
To read the summary, submit an
opinion or request an alert, please click
on the relevant buttons below. Before you can submit an
opinion, you'll need to tick the box on the form to say you
have read and agree to our Terms of use.
- Created: 01 February 2012
Issued By: Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
Submission date: 02 March 2012
Summary
About this consultation
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is proposing to revoke seven Statutory Instruments (Sis) – six regulations and one Order – that they have identified as being redundant or that have been superseded by more up to date Regulations. This consultation seeks views on this proposal.
Have your say
It is proposed that the following legislative instruments are revoked;
1. Anthrax Prevention Order 1971 etc (Revocation) Regulations 2005
2. Employment Medical Advisory Service (Factories Act Orders etc Amendment) Order 1973
3. Health and Safety (Foundries etc) (Metrication) Regulations 1981
4. Non-ferrous Metals (Melting and Founding) Regulations 1950
5. Pottery (Health and Welfare) Special Regulations 1950
6. Pottery (Health etc) (Metrication) Regulations 1982
7. Regulations for use of locomotives and wagons on lines and sidings in or used in connection with premises under the Factory Workshop Act 1901 (1906) (1906 No.679)
Tell us what you think by answering these questions
Question 1 Do you agree with the proposal to revoke the seven Statutory Instruments?
If ‘NO’, what are your objections?
Question 2 To the best of your knowledge, are any of these Regulations used in practice in the relevant sector/industry?
If ‘YES’ then:
(a) what costs do you estimate they impose, eg in terms of time spent by business?
(b) what benefits do you believe they bring, eg in terms of improved health and safety?
Question 3 Are there any further comments you would like to make on the issues raised on the consultation document?
Question 4 Is there anything you particularly liked or disliked about this consultation?
The consultation document, which outlines each set of Regulations and the Order that the HSE propose to revoke can be found in the link below, together with an explanation of why they are no longer required.
Your comments will help form our IOSH response to this consultation.
Submit opinion
Alert
- Created: 19 January 2012
Issued By: Chief Fire Officers Association (Scotland) and the Care Inspectorate
Submission date: 17 February 2012
Summary
About this consultation
The Chief Fire Officers Association (Scotland) and the Care Inspectorate have requested clarity on the application of fire safety legislation to certain types of care premises, in particular premises used for childminding.
Have your say
Stakeholder views are sought on changes to remove ambiguity for such premises. It is not suggested that any duties under the act should change; merely that ambiguity might be removed. It is also recognised that, in relation to fire hazards, childminding is a low risk activity typically carried out in domestic premises, so no additional routine inspections are proposed – however each childminder would have to confirm they have a suitable self assessment at the time of registration.
Having raised this issue in relation to childminding, the Scottish Government recognises that some other social care activities typically take place in ‘domestic premises’, and so are exempt from the provisions of the 2005 Act, whilst others are specifically included in the list of ‘relevant premises’ to which the Act does apply.
Your views are sought about:
• Whether there are other resulting ambiguities or anomalies.
• If the 2005 Act does apply, should such duty holders be specifically exempted from some record-keeping requirements because of the low risks, as is already the case for many small businesses?
• Finally the consultation seeks views on what is the right balance between ‘enforcement’ and ‘engagement’ for duty holders with such small scale (and thus low risk) premises, so as optimise public safety.
The consultation seeks answers to the following questions:
1 Do you agree that the legislation requires to be clarified to confirm that registered childminders are ‘relevant premises’ within the meaning of the 2005 Act?
2a For each category of regulated care services do you agree with the view provided as to whether the care premise/service are relevant premises? Please highlight any ambiguities.
2b Are there any other care premises where it is unclear whether the Part 3 fire safety duties apply?
3a Are there any other areas where there is a lack of understanding of the definition of ‘relevant premises’ which should be clarified?
3b If yes, is it your view that they should be defined as ‘relevant premises’?
4a If premises used for childminding are confirmed as ‘relevant premises’, should the obligations to record information (regulations 8 and 10(2)) be disapplied?
4b Are there any other provisions of fire safety legislation that should be disapplied or modified in their application to these premises? Give reasons.
5 If any other care or non-care premises are included as ‘relevant premises’ where formerly it was unclear whether they were defined as ‘relevant premises’, are there any fire safety provisions that should be modified or disapplied due to the nature or risk of the premises? Give reasons.
6 For premises which are ‘relevant premises’ and which are small scale and domestic in nature, how should regulatory bodies and/or Government best enable the duty holders to achieve appropriate fire safety standards? Eg guidance, advice, education.
Relevant submissions will form an important input to the drafting of the IOSH response to the consultation on the definition of ‘relevant premises’ contained within the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005.
Submit opinion
Alert