No review of 'reasonable practicability', says Government

The Government has categorically ruled out a review of 'reasonable practicability' and how it applies to health and safety law.  

In April, a committee of MPs said the requirement on UK employers to ensure the safety and health of workers "so far as is reasonably practicable" introduced "a lack of clarity that can increase the burden on employers in meeting their health and safety obligations."

The Work and Pensions Committee recommended that the Law Commission review the test of 'reasonable practicability' and how it applied to the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

However, the Government said it did not believe there would be any value in a further review. It said the committee itself had concluded that the current regulatory regime for health and safety was fit for purpose, and that 'reasonable practicability' was at the heart of the regime.

Last year the European Commission (EC) challenged the British Government in the European Court over 'reasonable practicability'. The EC complained that UK law allowed employers to escape responsibility if they could prove that the sacrifice involved in taking health and safety measures, whether in money, time or trouble, would be grossly disproportionate to the risk. This, it said, contravened EU health and safety law. However, the European Court ruled in Britain's favour.

In its broad review of health and safety, the Work and Pensions committee also said it was not convinced that guidance for directors, rather than a specific legal duty, was sufficient to ensure board-level prioritisation of health and safety issues. In its response, the Government said it believed there was currently an "appropriate balance" of legislative and voluntary responsibilities on directors for health and safety:

"The new leadership guidance for directors does not stand alone. It is just one aspect of the current arrangements, involving a mix of legislation, enforcement and voluntary guidance, which serve to focus directors' attention on their responsibilities for health and safety, and to influence their behaviour."

However, the Government went on to say that it was committed to revisit the question of director duties following a "timely, thorough and independent evaluation of the impact of the voluntary approach."

This evaluation, led by the HSE, but also involving businesses and trade unions, is due to begin in the latter half of 2009.