A recent prosecution case highlights the dangers for children in agricultural environments and that farms are not playgrounds. In the case, video footage taken by a neighbour captured the moment a farmer allowed one of his grandchildren to illegally ride in his tractor and ultimately led to his conviction.
Howard Walters, 78, was given a 12-month community order after he was spotted with the child in the tractor cab as he fed cattle on his farm in South Wales.
Walters had already been issued with a prohibition notice by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in November 2020 after admitting to inspectors he allowed his pre-teen grandchildren to ride in his tractor. However, just two months later, he was filmed by his neighbour flagrantly breaching the terms of that notice.
A HSE inspector who investigated Mr Walters says the law is “very clear”. Children under 13 are specifically prohibited from driving or riding on or in any agricultural machine, including the tractor cab.
At the time of committing the offence, Walters, of Tirmynydd Farm in Birchgrove, Swansea, was already the subject of a suspended prison sentence for unrelated environmental offences. In a case that was heard on 27 August 2024 at Swansea Crown Court, he was fined £500 for breaching the terms of that sentence. As part of his community order, Walters must attend 25 days of rehabilitation.
Agriculture remains one of the most dangerous industries in Britain, with on average around 29 people killed each year. Being killed by vehicles remains the most significant cause of work related fatality over the last five years.
Unfortunately, children are among those deaths with it often being the case that they are family members, with many killed by farm vehicles. Guidance is available for farmers on how to prevent accidents to children on farms.
Howard Walters, of Tirmynydd Farm in Birchgrove, Swansea, pleaded guilty to breaching section 33(1)(g) Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. He was given a 12 month community order and ordered to pay £3,000 in costs.
HSE inspector Simon Breen said:
“The law around children being allowed in the cabs of any agricultural vehicle is very clear. For any child to ride on agricultural machinery like a tractor is unsafe and illegal. The fact this farmer chose to ignore a prohibition notice for putting his grandchildren at risk is all the more staggering. We will take action against those who break the law. The solution is very simple – young children should never ride in agricultural vehicles.”
The HSE has published detailed guidance about child safety on farms and in agriculture which is available on its website.
How farmers can keep children safe on farms
Children must not be allowed in the farm workplace (young children should enjoy outdoor space in a secure fenced area).
Any access to the farm workplace by children under 16, for example for education, or knowledge / experience, must be planned and fully supervised by an adult not engaged in any work activity.
Children under the age of 13 years are specifically prohibited from driving or riding on any agricultural machine. It is illegal.
Properly trained, instructed, and supervised older children may, in tightly controlled circumstances, be able to help with some straightforward low risk tasks.
In the intricate world of corporate governance, maintaining a legislation register is not just a matter of compliance, but a cornerstone of sound business practice. A legislation register, often part of a company’s statutory registers, serves as a vital record that documents a company’s adherence to legal and regulatory requirements. The reasons for companies to maintain such a register are multifaceted and underscore the importance of transparency and accountability in the corporate sphere.
Firstly, a legislation register provides a historical and current record of a company’s compliance with laws and regulations. This is crucial for any business as it demonstrates due diligence and a commitment to lawful operation. It is a tangible way for a company to show that it is up to date with the ever-changing legal landscape, which can be particularly complex in areas such as environmental law, employment practices, and financial regulations.
Moreover, the register acts as a definitive guide to the company’s history, its directors, and its owners or shareholders. For instance, the register of members, which is a mandatory requirement under section 113 of the Companies Act 2006, is the authoritative statement of who the members of the company are and what shares they hold. This is not just a formality; it is the key evidence of ownership and is essential in the event of a sale, merger, or other significant share transactions.
Failure to maintain accurate statutory registers can lead to severe consequences. It is considered an offense by the company and each of its officers by default, and directors may also be found in breach of their duties. The implications of such breaches can be far-reaching, including legal penalties, delays in business transactions, and potential damage to the company’s reputation.
Furthermore, statutory registers are not to be confused with filings at Companies House, which is a public registry for making company information available. While these filings are necessary, they do not replace the need for a company to maintain its own statutory registers. The information filed at Companies House does not normally give legal effect to transactions, which is a common misconception that can lead to significant issues, such as the unlawful distribution of dividends or tax complications.
In essence, a legislation register is a safeguard, a reference point, and a source of truth for a company’s legal standing. It is an indispensable tool for ensuring that a company operates within the bounds of the law and maintains the trust of its stakeholders. By keeping a meticulous record of compliance, companies can navigate the complexities of corporate legislation with confidence and integrity.
In conclusion, the maintenance of a legislation register is a critical aspect of corporate governance. It is a reflection of a company’s commitment to legal compliance, transparency, and accountability. As the business environment continues to evolve, the role of the legislation register remains steadfast, providing clarity and certainty in a world of legal complexities. For any company looking to establish or maintain its credibility and legitimacy, a well-maintained legislation register is not just recommended—it is essential.
What are the key components of a legislation register
A legislation register is an essential tool for organisations to manage their legal and regulatory compliance. It serves as a comprehensive database that records all the legislative requirements applicable to the company’s operations. Here are the key components that typically constitute a legislation register:
Legal Requirements
This is the core of the register, listing all relevant laws, regulations, standards, and codes of practice that the organisation must comply with. It includes national, regional, and local laws, as well as industry-specific standards.
Description and Applicability
For each legal requirement listed, the register should provide a concise description. This includes the scope of the law, its objectives, and how it applies to the organisation’s activities and operations.
Compliance Status
The register should reflect the current compliance status for each legal requirement. This involves indicating whether the organisation is compliant, in the process of becoming compliant, or non-compliant, along with any notes on potential risks or issues. The register may also indicate the date when the legislation takes effect if it is at a future date.
Implementation Measures
This section details the actions taken by the organisation to comply with each legal requirement. It may include procedures, controls, training programs, and other measures implemented to ensure compliance.
Review and Update
Laws and regulations are subject to change, and the legislation register must be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect these changes. This ensures that the organisation remains compliant with the latest legal requirements and can make relevant adjustments to its operating practices where required.
Documentation and Records
The legislation register should include or reference all documentation that evidences compliance with the legal requirements. This could be policies, procedures, audit reports, or any other relevant records.
Evidence of Compliance
By maintaining a detailed and up-to-date legislation register, organisations can demonstrate their commitment to legal compliance, reduce the risk of non-compliance penalties, and maintain a reputation for integrity and responsibility. It is a critical component of effective governance and risk management strategies.
Consequences of inadequate records
Maintaining a comprehensive and accurate legislation register is a critical component of an organisation’s compliance and assurance framework. Inadequate record-keeping within such registers can have far-reaching and severe consequences for businesses. Here are some of the potential repercussions:
Legal Penalties
Organisations may face legal penalties for failing to keep adequate records. For example, in the UK, a penalty of up to £3,000 may be charged for each failure to keep or preserve adequate records related to tax returns or claims.
Poor Decision Making
Inadequate record-keeping can lead to poor decisions based on incomplete or outdated information. This can result in strategic missteps, financial losses, and missed opportunities.
Security Breaches
Failure to handle information securely can lead to data breaches, with sensitive information potentially being exposed. This not only violates data protection laws but can also cause harm to individuals and damage the organisation’s reputation.
Operational Inefficiencies
Poor records management can lead to inefficiencies within the organisation. Time and resources may be wasted searching for missing or poorly organised documents, leading to delays and reduced productivity. Poor records can also result in a knowledge gap within the organisation.
Legal Action
In some sectors such as health and social care, inadequate record-keeping can lead to severe consequences, including harm to clients and legal action against care providers. Accurate and up-to-date records are essential for the continuity of care and legal compliance. Accurate records can also prove to be valuable evidence in defending any claims or prosecutions by regulatory bodies.
Professional Consequences
Professionals may face personal and professional consequences due to poor record-keeping. This includes accountability for their actions and omissions, which could result in disciplinary action or loss of their licence to operate. Professionals such as accountants, medical staff and solicitors are governed by professional bodies which can take enforcement action against individuals.
Reputational Damage
An organisation’s reputation can suffer significantly if it becomes known for poor compliance practices. This can lead to a loss of trust among stakeholders, customers, and the public. This often leads to a drop in sales and increase in litigation.
Financial Implications
Inadequate record-keeping can have direct financial implications, from fines and penalties to the costs associated with rectifying the issues. It can also impact the organisation’s ability to secure funding or investment.
Audit Failures
Organisations may fail audits due to inadequate records, which can lead to further scrutiny from regulatory bodies and the potential for additional sanctions. Adverse audit findings can also discourage others from investing in the company or using it as a supplier.
Business Continuity Risks
In the event of a disaster or crisis, poor record-keeping can hinder recovery efforts, as vital information may be inaccessible or lost. Robust business continuity plans will indicate what records are available and required to quickly recover from a crisis.
In conclusion, the importance of maintaining a robust legislation register cannot be overstated. Organisations must recognise the potential consequences of inadequate record-keeping and take proactive steps to ensure their compliance records are complete, accurate, and up-to-date. This involves implementing effective records management policies, regular training for staff, and the use of technology to streamline the record-keeping process. By doing so, organisations can mitigate risks, maintain operational efficiency, and uphold their legal and ethical responsibilities.
Keep your legislation register up to date
In the dynamic landscape of legal compliance, keeping legislation registers current is a critical task for organisations. A legislation register that is not up to date can lead to non-compliance with current laws and regulations, potentially resulting in legal penalties and reputational damage. Here are some strategies organisations can employ to ensure their legislation registers remain current:
Regular reviews of the legislation register
Organisations should establish a routine for regularly reviewing and updating their legislation registers. This could be monthly, quarterly, or biannually, depending on the nature of the industry and the rate of legislative changes typically experienced in that sector.
Dedicated compliance team
Having a team or an individual responsible for compliance can ensure focused oversight of the legislation register. This team should have a clear understanding of the legal landscape and the organisation’s obligations and serve as an early warning system of new legislative impacts and non-compliance.
Subscription to a legal updates service
Many services provide updates on new and amended legislation. Subscribing to these can alert organisations to changes that may affect their operations and should be reflected in the legislation register.
Use of compliance software
There are compliance software solutions that automatically update legal registers with new and amended legislation. These can be particularly useful for organisations operating in multiple jurisdictions or sectors with frequent regulatory changes. However, these software options can be expensive particularly for small companies.
Engagement with legal advisor or consultant
Regular consultations with legal advisor, such as a solicitor or barrister, or a consultant can help organisations interpret complex legislation and understand how changes impact their operations. Legal advisors and consultants can also assist in updating the legislation register accurately as well as providing practical advice on the implementation and compliance with legislation.
Training and awareness of the legislation register
Ensuring that staff are trained and aware of the importance of the legislation register can foster a culture of compliance. Staff should be encouraged to report any legal changes they become aware of in their areas of work or through trade associations or other avenues of information.
Government and Industry Resources
Utilising resources provided by government bodies and industry associations can be a valuable way of staying informed about legislative changes. These organisations often provide guidance and updates relevant to their stakeholders which supplements the actual legislation.
Audit and verification of the legislation register
Periodic audits of the legislation register can verify its accuracy and completeness. This can be done internally or by an external auditor, providing an additional layer of assurance.
Feedback Mechanism
Implementing a feedback mechanism where employees can contribute information on legislative changes can help keep the register comprehensive and up to date.
Technology Integration
Integrating the legislation register with other organisational systems, such as risk management or enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, can help streamline the update process and ensure consistency across the organisation.
By employing these strategies, organisations can maintain a robust approach to legal compliance and ensure their legislation registers are always reflective of the current legal requirements. This proactive stance not only safeguards against legal risks but also reinforces the organisation’s commitment to ethical business practices and corporate governance.
Legislation register support and advice
In the intricate tapestry of modern business, the legal advisor emerges as a pivotal figure, weaving through the complex threads of legislation to guide companies towards compliance and strategic success. The role of legal counsel within a company or group extends far beyond the traditional boundaries of legal advice; they are the sentinels of corporate strategy, the architects of risk management, and the harbingers of ethical business practices.
Understanding the legal landscape
The legal landscape is ever evolving, with new regulations and laws constantly shaping the business environment. Legal counsel serves as the company’s compass, navigating through these changes with foresight and expertise. By staying abreast of legislative developments, legal counsel ensures that companies not only comply with current laws but are also prepared for future amendments.
Strategic integration of compliance expertise
The integration of legal expertise into business strategy is not a mere addition but a fusion that fortifies the company’s foundation. Legal counsel scrutinises every strategic initiative, ensuring alignment with legal requirements and safeguarding against potential pitfalls. Their involvement from the inception of strategic planning is crucial, as it allows for the identification and mitigation of legal risks before they materialize.
Risk management and compliance with a legislation register
Risk management is an integral part of the legal counsel’s repertoire. Through comprehensive risk assessments, legal counsel identifies potential vulnerabilities within the company’s operations. They craft tailored compliance programs that not only address these risks but also align business operations with the relevant laws and regulations, thus minimising the likelihood of disputes and reputational damage.
Shaping corporate culture
Legal counsel also plays a vital role in shaping the company’s culture. By instilling core values and fostering a culture of integrity, legal counsel ensures that employees’ decisions resonate with the company’s ethical standards. This cultural alignment is essential for creating a positive work environment and maintaining a reputation for integrity.
The business advisor
Legal counsel often transcends their legal role to act as strategic business advisors. Their insights into the legal implications of business decisions enable them to contribute significantly to the company’s growth and strategic objectives. They are instrumental in identifying business opportunities that comply with legal standards, thus driving sustainable growth.
In conclusion, legal counsel is indispensable for companies aiming to navigate the complexities of legislation. Their strategic role in ensuring compliance, managing risks, and shaping corporate culture is invaluable. By leveraging the expertise of legal counsel, companies can secure a competitive edge, foster a culture of ethical decision-making, and achieve their strategic goals within the legal framework.
For a deeper understanding of the multifaceted role of legal counsel in business strategy, readers are encouraged to explore the insightful articles provided by industry experts.
How to find the right support for your legislation register
For any business, finding the right support for drafting and updating its legislation register is a critical step that can have a significant impact on its success and longevity. The legal landscape is fraught with complexities and ever-changing regulations that require expert navigation. Often companies will simply not have the resources to have their own legal counsel or solicitor in-house. External solicitors, barristers and specialist consultants can provide support to companies in drafting and maintaining legislation registers. In selecting such support, companies need to consider some important factors.
Understanding the legal requirements for a legislation register
Before embarking on the search for external support and advice, it is essential for a company to understand its legal requirements. This involves a thorough assessment of the business’s industry, the nature of its operations, and the specific legal challenges it faces. Whether it is compliance, intellectual property, labour laws, or international trade, identifying the areas where advice and support is needed will streamline the search.
Prioritising commitment and interest
When selecting external advice and support, it’s crucial to prioritise a consultant’s commitment and interest in your business. A consultant who is genuinely interested in your company will go the extra mile to understand your business model, objectives, and challenges. This commitment translates into tailored advice and proactive strategies that align with your business goals.
Matching personalities and approaches
The relationship between a company and its consultant is built on trust and communication. It is important to match a consultant’s personality and approach with the company’s culture and values. A consultant who resonates with the company’s ethos can effectively become an extension of the team, working seamlessly with other departments and stakeholders.
Seeking clear communication
Clear and understandable communication is a non-negotiable trait in consultants. Complex legal jargon can often obfuscate the real issues at hand. A consultant who can translate legislative concepts into clear, actionable advice will empower a company to make informed decisions.
Valuing adaptability and business understanding
The business world is dynamic, and your consultant must be adaptable to keep pace with changes. A consultant who understands the nuances of business and can adapt their compliance advice accordingly is invaluable. This understanding ensures that compliance strategies are not only in place but also conducive to business growth.
Ensuring scalability with growth
As a company grows, its compliance needs will evolve. It is important to consider whether the consultant can scale their services to match the company’s trajectory. A consultant who can handle the increasing complexity and volume of compliance matters as the business expands is a strategic asset.
Considering specialised expertise
Depending on the company’s industry and the nature of its compliance issues, specialised expertise may be required. Consultants with niche expertise bring a depth of knowledge and experience that can be critical for certain compliance challenges. It is worth considering whether a generalist or a specialist would better serve the company’s needs.
Finding the right fit
Ultimately, finding the right compliance consultant is about finding the right fit for the company. This involves a careful consideration of the consultant’s expertise, approach, communication style, and ability to grow with the business. By taking the time to find a consultant who aligns with these criteria, a company can establish a strong foundation for compliance support that contributes to its overall success.
Warning signs
Choosing the right consultant is a crucial decision for any individual or business. The quality of compliance advice can significantly influence the outcome of enforcement matters and the overall success of a company. However, not all consultants are created equal, and it is important to be aware of potential red flags that could indicate a consultant may not be the best fit for your needs.
Lack of specialisation
Compliance is a vast field with numerous subfields, each requiring specific knowledge and experience. A consultant who lacks specialisation in the area relevant to your business may not have the depth of knowledge necessary to provide effective advice. It is essential to choose a consultant with a proven track record in the specific area of your business.
Poor communication
Effective communication is the foundation of a successful consultant-client relationship. Be cautious of compliance consultants who are slow to respond to inquiries or vague in their responses. Consistent, clear, and timely communication is key to ensuring that you are informed and comfortable with the progress of your compliance matters.
Overpromising
Be wary of consultants who guarantee specific outcomes or make promises that seem too good to be true. Compliance processes are often unpredictable, and no ethical consultant can assure a particular result. Overpromising may be a sign of inexperience or a lack of honesty.
Fee structure ambiguity
Transparency in billing practices is critical. If a consultant is not clear about their fees or avoids discussing costs until after they have started advising you, this is a red flag. A trustworthy consultant will be upfront about their fee structure, including hourly rates, flat fees, or retainers.
Negative reviews
Researching a consultant’s reputation is an important step. Negative reviews can indicate past issues with clients or unethical behaviour. While one negative review may not be cause for concern, a pattern of dissatisfaction from clients should raise alarms.
Lack of empathy or interest
Compliance in your company is important to you and the consultant you choose should treat it with the seriousness it deserves. A lack of empathy or a disinterested demeanour is not only a red flag regarding the potential quality of advice but also about the consultant-client relationship dynamic.
In conclusion, selecting the right compliance consultant requires careful consideration and due diligence. By being aware of these red flags and taking the time to thoroughly vet potential consultants, you can increase your chances of finding a compliance professional who will provide the quality representation and support you need.
A company has been fined £160,000 after an employee looses legs in accident whilst working at its site near Warrington.
On 20 June 2022, Andrew McAuley, from Runcorn, an employee of William Stobart & Son Limited was picking orders at the firm’s warehouse in Appleton Thorn.
The 64-year-old was working in close proximity to a forklift truck (FLT) which was being used to load pallets of slate tiles onto a waiting truck. The FLT was carrying two pallets, one on top of the other. The top pallet was not secured to the one below, and when the driver turned the vehicle, both pallets became detached from the forks, with the upper pallet striking Mr McAuley, crushing his legs.
Mr McAuley had to have both legs amputated below the knee. He has been left dependent upon a wheelchair and unable to drive or climb stairs, leading to the need for extensive adaptations to the family home.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that William Stobart & Son Limited failed to ensure this area of the warehouse was organised so that vehicles and pedestrians were segregated and circulated in a safe manner and loads were secured so far as was reasonably practicable.
William Stobart & Son Limited, of Ashville Way Industrial Estate, Sutton Weaver, Runcorn, Cheshire pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £160,000 and ordered to pay £4,478 costs at a hearing at Warrington Magistrates Court on 30 July 2024.
Accident preventable
After the hearing HSE Inspector Lorna Sherlock said:
“Mr McAuley has been left with devastating and life changing injuries. The company failed to implement a safe system of work for loading and unloading activities, thereby exposing employees, and others, to the risk of being struck by loads or workplace vehicles. This case illustrates the consequences of failing to segregate vehicles and pedestrians, and to properly secure loads. This injury could easily have been prevented. Employers should make sure they assess work activities sufficiently and apply effective control measures to minimise the risk from workplace transport.”
Employee transport safety
Employers who operate depots must ensure that a suitable and sufficient risk assessment is undertaken covering the transport risks. When considering the risks from vehicle manoeuvring, employers must ensure that vehicles have large enough windscreens (with wipers where necessary) and external mirrors to provide an all-round field of vision. It is often worthwhile adding extra mirrors to reduce blind spots for drivers. Side mirrors can allow drivers of larger vehicles to see cyclists and pedestrians alongside their vehicles and can be effective in improving visibility around the vehicle from the driving position. These mirrors are fitted to larger road-going vehicles as standard.
Drivers should not place items in the windscreen area or in the way of mirrors or monitors, where they might impede visibility from the driving position. The area of the windscreen that is kept clear by the wipers should not be obscured, and nor should the side windows. Windows and mirrors will also normally need to be kept clean and in good repair. Dirt or cracks can make windows or mirrors less effective.
Some types of vehicles (such as straddle carriers, large shovel loaders and some large quarry vehicles) often have poor visibility from the cab. Visibility can be poor to the side or front of a vehicle as well as behind and loads on vehicles can severely limit the visibility from the driving position.
Lift trucks and compact dumper vehicles in particular can have difficulty with forward visibility when they are transporting bulky loads. Employers should recognise these risks in their risk assessment and think about ways to minimise them.
Closed-circuit television (CCTV) may help drivers to see clearly behind or around the vehicle. CCTV can cover most blind spots and the cost of fitting CCTV systems has fallen since the technology was first developed. Companies who have fitted CCTV have found that it can reduce the number of reversing accidents, so the systems usually pay for themselves in a few years.
Colour systems can provide a clearer image where there is little contrast (for example, outside on an overcast day). However, black-and-white systems normally provide a better image in lower light or darkness, and usually come with infra-red, which can be more effective than standard cameras at night.
Monitors should have adjustable contrast, brightness and resolution controls to make them useful in the different light conditions in which they will be used. Drivers may need to use a hood to shield any monitor from glare.
If possible, fit the camera for a CCTV system high up in the middle of the vehicle’s rear (one camera), or in the upper corners (two cameras). This will provide a greater field of vision and a better angle for the driver to judge distance and provide. It also keeps the camera clear of dust and spray, and out of the reach of thieves or vandals.
However, CCTV systems do have some limitations which employers should consider:
If the vehicle leaves a darker area to a more strongly lit area (for example, driving out of a building) the system may need time to adjust to the brightness.
A dirty lens will make a camera much less effective.
Drivers may find it difficult to judge heights and distances.
Drivers should not be complacent about safety even with CCTV systems installed. They should be trained in proper use of the equipment and employers have a duty to provide such training and instruction.
Reversing alarms may be drowned out by other noise or may be so common on a busy site that pedestrians do not take any notice. It can also be hard to know exactly where an alarm is coming from, and people who are less able to hear are also at greater risk. Alarms can also disturb nearby residents. However, reversing alarms may be appropriate (based on the risk assessment) but might be most effectively used with other measures, such as warning lights.
In the United Kingdom, emergency planning is a critical aspect of business management that ensures the safety and continuity of operations in the face of unexpected events. The Civil Contingencies Act 2004, established by the UK government, provides a framework for emergency preparedness, placing responsibilities on various organisations to prepare and respond effectively to emergencies.
Category 1 Emergency Responders
Category 1 responders, such as emergency services, local authorities, and NHS bodies, are at the core of emergency response and are subject to a full set of civil protection duties. These duties include risk assessment, contingency planning, establishing emergency plans, and making information available to the public about civil protection matters. They also have the responsibility to warn, inform, and advise the public during emergencies.
Category 2 Organisations
Category 2 organisations, which include the Health and Safety Executive, transport, and utility companies, are considered ‘co-operating bodies.’ They have a lesser set of duties but play a crucial role in incidents affecting their sectors. Both Category 1 and 2 responders form local resilience forums, which facilitate coordination and cooperation at the local level.
Business
Businesses, as part of the community, have a role to play in emergency planning. Local authorities provide advice and assistance to businesses to help them develop business continuity management arrangements. This is crucial for minimizing the impact of emergencies on business operations and the economy at large.
The government’s guidance on emergency planning emphasizes the importance of preventing emergencies where possible and mitigating their effects when they occur. Businesses are encouraged to assess risks, create emergency plans, and train employees to respond to various scenarios. Additionally, businesses should consider the continuity of critical functions and the well-being of employees during an emergency.
The Prepare campaign offers practical steps for individuals and businesses to prepare for emergencies. These include learning basic first aid, making a plan for escape routes, and writing down important phone numbers. Being prepared can significantly reduce the disruption caused by emergencies.
In conclusion, emergency planning in UK business is not just a legal requirement but a practical necessity. It involves a collaborative effort between the government, responder agencies, and businesses to ensure that when emergencies occur, the impact on people, property, and the environment is minimised. By following the established guidelines and taking proactive steps, businesses can contribute to a resilient community that can withstand and recover from emergencies.
Common Business Risks
Businesses, regardless of size or industry, face a multitude of risks that can impact their operations and financial stability. Identifying and managing these risks is crucial for the sustainability and growth of any enterprise. Here are some common risks that businesses should consider:
Economic Risks
Economic fluctuations can pose significant threats to businesses. Changes in market conditions, such as inflation, recession, or shifts in consumer demand, can affect sales and profitability. Companies must have robust financial planning and management strategies to navigate economic uncertainties.
Market Risks
Misjudging market demand is a common pitfall. Conducting thorough market research and understanding consumer needs are vital to ensure that products and services meet market demands. Developing a unique selling proposition can also help differentiate from competitors.
Competitive Risks
The competitive landscape can change rapidly, with new entrants or innovations disrupting the market. Businesses need to stay agile, continuously innovate, and adapt their strategies to maintain a competitive edge.
Execution Risks
Flaws in the execution of business strategies can derail even the most well-thought-out plans. Effective project management and operational efficiency are key to mitigating execution risks.
Strategic Risks
Strategic decisions, such as entering new markets or launching new products, come with inherent risks. Businesses should conduct strategic analysis and scenario planning to anticipate potential outcomes and prepare accordingly.
Compliance Risks
Regulatory environments are constantly evolving. Non-compliance with laws and regulations can lead to fines, legal action, and reputational damage. It’s essential for businesses to stay informed and compliant with relevant regulations.
Operational Risks
Operational issues, such as supply chain disruptions or system failures, can have immediate and severe impacts on business continuity. Implementing risk management processes and contingency plans can help minimise these risks.
Reputational Risks
A company’s reputation is one of its most valuable assets. Negative publicity, whether true or not, can damage a business’s brand and customer trust. Active reputation management and effective communication strategies are crucial for reputation risk management.
Cybersecurity Risks
With the increasing reliance on digital technologies, cybersecurity threats such as data breaches and cyber-attacks have become more prevalent. Investing in robust cybersecurity measures and employee training is critical for protecting sensitive information.
Climate Change Risks
The effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and regulatory changes related to environmental sustainability, can affect businesses. Developing a sustainability strategy and adapting business practices to be more environmentally friendly can mitigate these risks.
By understanding these common business risks, companies can develop comprehensive risk management strategies that protect their interests and ensure long-term success. It’s not just about avoiding risks but also about seizing opportunities that arise from a well-managed risk landscape. For more detailed insights into managing these risks, businesses can refer to specialized resources and consult with risk management experts.
Assess and prioritise
In the dynamic world of business, risk assessment and prioritization are critical processes that enable organisations to navigate uncertainties with strategic foresight. The ability to identify, evaluate, and rank risks based on their potential impact and likelihood is not just about preventing potential pitfalls; it’s about positioning a business to seize opportunities with calculated confidence.
Understanding Risk Assessment and Prioritisation for an emergency
Risk assessment is the systematic examination of all aspects of a business to identify potential risks that could threaten operational efficiency, financial stability, legal standing, and reputation. It is a proactive measure that empowers businesses to anticipate possible obstacles and devise strategies to mitigate them. This process involves not only anticipating the obvious but also uncovering hidden vulnerabilities within an organisation and the external environment it operates within.
Risk prioritisation, on the other hand, is the process of evaluating and ranking these risks to determine which ones require immediate attention and resources. This ensures that organisations focus on the most significant threats and opportunities, aligning with their strategic objectives and resource availability.
Strategies for Effective Risk Prioritisation for an emergency
Establish Clear Criteria
Define what constitutes a ‘risk‘ within your organisation and establish clear criteria for evaluation. This could include potential impact, likelihood, and the speed at which a risk could affect the organisation.
Engage Stakeholders
Involve stakeholders from various levels of the organisation in the risk assessment process. Their insights can provide a comprehensive view of the risks and help in prioritising them effectively.
Use Quantitative and Qualitative Data
Employ both quantitative and qualitative data to assess risks. Quantitative data can provide a numerical basis for risk evaluation, while qualitative data can offer context and depth to the analysis.
Implement a Risk Matrix
A risk matrix can help visualize and prioritize risks by categorising them based on their severity and likelihood. This tool is instrumental in simplifying complex information and facilitating decision-making.
Continuous Monitoring
Risk assessment is not a one-time event but an ongoing process. Continuously monitor and review risks, adapting strategies to evolving market conditions, technological advancements, and regulatory changes.
Leverage Technology
Utilise risk management software and tools to streamline the risk assessment and prioritisation process. These tools can provide real-time data, analytics, and reporting capabilities to enhance decision-making.
Conclusion
For businesses, mastering the art of risk assessment and prioritisation is essential for sustainable growth and innovation. It’s about understanding the balance between potential rewards and risks, ensuring that the business can thrive amidst uncertainties. By accurately identifying and prioritising risks, businesses are not just protecting themselves; they are setting the stage for resilience and success in an ever-evolving landscape.
Remember, prioritising risk is a continuous journey, reflecting the dynamic nature of business and the external environment. Stay vigilant, adaptable, and informed to navigate the complexities of risk management with confidence.
Risk management plan for an emergency
Creating a Risk Management Plan for an emergency: A Step-by-Step Guide
Risk management is an essential aspect of project management that involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating potential risks that could impact a project’s success. A well-crafted risk management plan (RMP) not only helps in avoiding potential threats but also ensures that the project is well-equipped to handle uncertainties. Here’s a step-by-step guide to creating a comprehensive risk management plan for your project.
Step 1: Define the Scope and Objectives of the Plan
Before you begin, clearly define the scope of your project and the objectives of your risk management plan. This will help you understand what you need to focus on and what you aim to achieve with your RMP.
Step 2: Risk Identification
Start by listing all possible risks that could affect your project. This includes both internal and external risks, ranging from operational challenges to market fluctuations. Engage your team and stakeholders in brainstorming sessions to ensure a thorough identification process.
Step 3: Risk Analysis
Once you have identified the risks, analyse each one based on its likelihood and potential impact. This will help you understand which risks are more significant and should be prioritized.
Step 4: Risk Prioritisation
Using the information from your risk analysis, prioritise the risks. A common tool for this is a risk matrix, which helps you categorize risks based on their severity and likelihood.
Step 5: Risk Mitigation Strategies
For each high-priority risk, develop mitigation strategies. These are plans that detail how you will reduce or eliminate the risk’s potential impact. Assign a responsible person or team to manage each risk.
Step 6: Risk Monitoring and Review
Risks and their potential impact can change over time. Set up a process for monitoring identified risks and reviewing them regularly. This will help you stay ahead of any changes and adjust your strategies accordingly.
Step 7: Communication Plan
Create a communication plan that outlines how and when you will communicate about risks to your team and stakeholders. This ensures everyone is informed and can react promptly if necessary.
Step 8: Approval and Implementation
Once your risk management plan is developed, seek approval from key stakeholders. After approval, implement the plan and ensure that everyone involved understands their roles and responsibilities.
Step 9: Continuous Improvement
Risk management is an ongoing process. Learn from past projects and continuously improve your RMP. This could involve updating your risk identification and analysis methods or refining your mitigation strategies.
Conclusion
A risk management plan is a living document that evolves with your project. It requires collaboration, continuous monitoring, and adaptability. By following these steps, you can create a robust RMP that prepares your project for the uncertainties ahead, ensuring a higher chance of success.
Remember, the fidelity of your risk management plan will vary depending on the nature of your project and the standard operating procedures that your organisation uses. Whether it is a detailed document or a concise outline, the key is to have a clear, actionable plan that addresses the unique risks of your project.
Risk mitigation strategies for an emergency
Risk Mitigation Strategies: Preparing for an emergency
In the ever-evolving landscape of business, risk is an inevitable companion. However, the way organisations approach these risks can significantly influence their trajectory towards success or failure. Risk mitigation strategies are essential tools that help businesses navigate uncertainties, ensuring stability and growth. This blog post delves into the common risk mitigation strategies that can safeguard an organisation’s interests.
Understanding Risk Mitigation
Risk mitigation is a proactive approach to identify, assess, and address potential threats that could adversely affect an organisation’s objectives, assets, or operations. It involves creating specific action plans aimed at reducing the likelihood or impact of these risks.
Why Risk Mitigation Matters
The importance of risk mitigation cannot be overstated. With the increasing complexity of risk events, a robust risk mitigation plan is not just a defensive measure but also a strategic advantage. It provides a clearer picture of potential obstacles, aids in strategic decision-making, and ensures business continuity in the face of disruptions.
Common Risk Mitigation Strategies for an emergency
Risk Avoidance – This strategy involves altering plans to circumvent potential risks entirely. It’s the most straightforward approach but may not always be feasible, as it could also mean missing out on opportunities.
Risk Reduction – Risk reduction strategies aim to minimize the probability or impact of a risk event. This could involve implementing safety measures, improving processes, or adopting new technologies.
Risk Transference – Transferring risk means shifting the potential impact to a third party, such as through insurance policies or outsourcing certain operations.
Risk Acceptance – Sometimes, the cost of mitigating a risk may outweigh the potential impact. In such cases, businesses may choose to accept the risk, acknowledging it as a part of their operational landscape.
Implementing Risk Mitigation Strategies
Effective risk mitigation requires a thorough understanding of the unique challenges an organization faces. It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution; strategies must be tailored to the specific needs and context of the business. Here are steps to implement these strategies:
Identify Risks: Understand the types of risks your business may encounter, such as competitor, economic, political, or financial risks.
Assess Risks: Evaluate the likelihood and potential impact of each risk.
Develop Action Plans: Create detailed plans for how to avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept each identified risk.
Monitor and Review: Continuously monitor risks and the effectiveness of your mitigation strategies, adjusting as necessary.
Risk mitigation is an integral part of strategic planning and execution. By identifying and minimizing risks, organisations can not only protect themselves from potential threats but also position themselves to seize growth opportunities. The key is to implement a dynamic and responsive risk mitigation strategy that evolves with the changing business environment.
In this article we look at why you need a waste audit and the benefits from it. In the United Kingdom, businesses and organisations are increasingly recognising the critical role that waste audits play in their sustainability efforts. A waste audit is a detailed analysis of an entity’s waste stream, identifying what types of waste are being produced, in what quantities, and how they are being managed. This process is not only a regulatory requirement but also a step towards environmental responsibility and cost efficiency.
It is estimated that the UK generated 40.4 million tonnes of commercial and industrial (C&I) waste in 2020, of which 33.8 million tonnes (84%) was generated in England. The latest estimates for England only, indicate that C&I waste generation was around 33.9 million tonnes in 2021.
The UK’s stringent waste management regulations, governed by the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011, mandate businesses to classify, segregate, and store waste appropriately. Waste audits provide tangible evidence of compliance with these legal requirements, helping businesses avoid potential fines and legal issues. Moreover, they ensure that Environmental Management System (EMS) certification standards are met, which can be crucial for maintaining corporate reputation and consumer trust.
Waste audit steps
Conducting a waste audit involves several steps, starting with understanding the different types of waste produced by the organisation. It is essential to set a specific time frame for the audit, ideally during a typical operational period to get an accurate representation of the waste generated. The audit can highlight inefficiencies in waste management practices and identify opportunities for reducing waste production, promoting recycling, and improving overall environmental performance.
For businesses looking to conduct a waste audit, there are resources available that provide guidance on the process. These include six-step guides that cover everything from understanding your waste to implementing changes that can reduce waste collection and disposal costs while minimising the amount of waste sent to landfills. Companies may also engage specialist consultants to undertake the audit and report on its findings.
The benefits of waste audits extend beyond regulatory compliance. They can showcase a company’s eco-friendly credentials, secure new customers, access better loans, win prestigious awards, and even cash in on selected grants. In the UK’s business landscape, being green is no longer just a trend, it is a real competitive advantage!
Waste audits are an indispensable tool for businesses aiming to improve their sustainability. They provide a systematic approach to understanding and managing waste, leading to significant environmental and financial benefits. As the country continues to strive for a greener future, waste audits will undoubtedly remain a cornerstone of corporate environmental strategy.
Common Findings in UK Waste Audits: Insights and Implications
Waste audits are a critical component of waste management strategies across the UK, providing valuable insights into the types and quantities of waste produced by businesses and organisations. These audits often reveal common trends and issues that, when addressed, can lead to significant improvements in waste management practices.
One of the most frequent findings in waste audits is the high volume of recyclable materials that are incorrectly disposed of as general waste. This not only includes common items like paper, cardboard, and plastics but also electronic waste and certain types of glass. The mismanagement of these recyclable materials not only impacts the environment but also represents a lost opportunity for businesses to reduce waste disposal costs. More importantly, it may also be illegal and put the company at risk of prosecution by enforcement authorities such as the Environment Agency.
Another common observation is the lack of proper segregation at the source. Many businesses fail to implement effective waste separation practices, leading to contamination of recycling streams and increased processing costs. Education and training for staff on how to correctly segregate waste can mitigate this issue and enhance the efficiency of recycling programs.
Food waste is another significant component of the waste stream, often due to over-purchasing, improper storage, and lack of composting options. This not only contributes to the environmental problem of methane emissions from landfills but also represents a substantial financial loss for businesses.
In addition to these, waste audits frequently identify the presence of hazardous waste in general waste bins. This includes items like batteries, chemicals, and medical waste, which require special handling and disposal methods to prevent harm to the environment and human health.
The findings from waste audits can serve as a catalyst for change, prompting businesses to adopt more sustainable waste management practices. By addressing the common issues identified, companies can improve their operational efficiency, comply with regulatory requirements, and contribute to a more sustainable future.
For businesses looking to conduct their own waste audits, there are numerous resources and professional services available to guide them through the process. These services can provide tailored advice and solutions to help businesses optimise their waste management systems and achieve their sustainability goals.
Waste audits consistently uncover areas where businesses can improve their waste management practices. By acting on these findings, businesses can not only reduce their environmental impact but also realise financial savings and enhance their reputation as responsible corporate citizens.
Measuring the Impact of Waste Audits in UK Businesses
Businesses are increasingly aware of the importance of sustainability and waste reduction. Measuring the impact of these efforts is crucial for understanding their effectiveness and for making informed decisions on future waste management strategies.
Here are some key methods that businesses can employ to measure the impact of their waste reduction efforts:
Waste Audit Analysis
Conducting regular waste audits is a foundational step. By analysing the types and quantities of waste produced, businesses can identify key areas for reduction and track progress over time.
Recycling Rates
Monitoring the percentage of waste that is recycled is a straightforward metric. It provides insight into how much waste is being diverted from landfills and can be a strong indicator of the success of recycling programs.
Employee Engagement
Gathering feedback from employees can offer a qualitative measure of the waste reduction culture within a business. Engaged employees are more likely to follow sustainable practices and contribute to waste reduction goals.
Financial Savings
Tracking cost savings from reduced waste disposal fees can quantify the financial impact. Additionally, savings from reusing materials or selling recyclable waste can be factored into this metric.
Environmental Impact
Calculating the reduction in carbon footprint or other environmental metrics can demonstrate the broader impact of waste reduction efforts. This can include measurements like greenhouse gas emissions avoided by recycling and reusing materials.
Sustainability Reporting
Creating detailed sustainability reports that include waste reduction metrics can help businesses communicate their progress to stakeholders and customers, enhancing their reputation and potentially leading to increased business opportunities.
Waste Audit Benchmarking
Comparing waste reduction metrics against industry benchmarks or past performance can provide context for the impact of a business’s efforts. This can help set realistic goals and drive continuous improvement.
Certifications and Awards
Achieving certifications or awards for environmental performance can serve as a measure of a business’s commitment to waste reduction and sustainability. These recognitions often have criteria based on measurable waste reduction achievements.
Waste audit conclusions
The benefits of waste audits extend beyond regulatory compliance. They can showcase a company’s eco-friendly credentials, secure new customers, access better loans, win prestigious awards, and even cash in on selected grants.
By employing these methods, businesses can effectively measure the impact of their waste reduction efforts, demonstrating their commitment to sustainability and reaping the associated benefits. For more detailed guidance on implementing these measures, businesses can contact one of the Ashbrooke team.
Big fines for water firms as Ofwat imposed penalties of £168 million in relation to failure to manage waste water at three companies.
Ofwat has today (6 August 2024) proposed that three water companies will be fined a total of £168m for failing to manage their wastewater treatment works and networks, as part of the first batch of outcomes from its biggest ever investigation.
The penalties relate to their management of wastewater treatment works and wider sewer networks including their operation of storm overflows. These are designed to release water in exceptional circumstances, when the sewerage system is at risk of being overwhelmed, such as during unusually heavy downpours or snowfall, to prevent sewage flooding into people’s homes.
Big fines for water firms’ failures
Ofwat has found that all three firms have:
Failed to ensure that discharges of untreated wastewater from storm overflows occur only in exceptional circumstances which has resulted in harm to the environment and their customers.
Shown a strong correlation between high spill levels and operational issues at wastewater treatment sites which points to these companies not having properly operated and maintained their wastewater treatment works.
Failed to upgrade assets, where necessary, to ensure they meet the changing needs of the local area they serve.
Been slow to understand the scope of their obligations relating to limiting pollution from storm overflows and failed to ensure that they had in place the necessary information, processes and oversight to enable them to properly comply with those requirements.
However, the scale of the breaches Ofwat has found, differs between each of the wastewater companies. Investigations by the regulator found that:
Thames Water had 67% of its wastewater treatment works with FFT permits found to have capacity and operational issues. 16% of its storm overflows associated with its wastewater treatment works were found to be in breach.
Yorkshire Water had 16% of its wastewater treatment works with FFT permits found to have capacity or operational problems. 45% of its storm overflows associated with its wastewater treatment works were found to be in breach.
Northumbrian Water had 3% of its wastewater treatment works with FFT permits found to have capacity or operational problems. 9% of its storm overflows associated with its wastewater treatment works were found to be in breach.
Therefore, in addition to the proposed big fines for water firms, Ofwat is also consulting on proposed enforcement orders which will require each company to rectify the problems Ofwat has identified to ensure they comply with their legal and regulatory obligations.
Companies will not be able to recover the money for any proposed penalties from customers and Ofwat will ensure that customers are not charged twice where additional maintenance is required.
Ofwat’s Chief Executive David Black said:
Ofwat has uncovered a catalogue of failure by Thames Water, Yorkshire Water and Northumbrian Water in how they ran their sewage works and this resulted in excessive spills from storm overflows. Our investigation has shown how they routinely released sewage into our rivers and seas, rather than ensuring that this only happens in exceptional circumstances as the law intends.
The level of penalties we intend to impose signals both the severity of the failings and our determination to take action to ensure water companies do more to deliver cleaner rivers and seas.
These companies need to move at pace to put things right and meet their obligations to protect customers and the environment. They also need to transform how they look after the environment and to focus on doing better in the future.
Looking to the future we want transform companies’ performance under our new price control that starts in April next year, so we reduce spills from sewage overflows by 44 per cent by 2030 compared to 2021 levels.
These proposed findings are the first three cases Ofwat has open in its wider investigation to reach this stage. This investigation is a priority for Ofwat, and it will continue to work as quickly as possible on the eight further cases.
Enforcement notices have been issued to the three water companies fined:
Ofwat can impose big fines on water firms, the value of which can be up to 10% of relevant turnover. For each company, the fines applied in this investigation equates to (i) Thames Water – 9% of turnover, (ii) Yorkshire Water – 7% of turnover, and (iii) Northumbrian Water – 5% of turnover.
The big fines for water firms were issued under Section 22A Water Industry Act 1991 provides details of how financial penalties are calculated and imposed with accompanying guidance.
These penalties are separate to the commitments that have been set out as part of PR24 draft determinations for all wastewater companies which will see £9.5bn overall enhancement expenditure for storm overflow improvements to meet their new performance commitment targets.
Big fines for water firms are likely to continue when the sector is facing unprecedented challenges, with climate change, population growth, urbanisation, and emerging pollutants all putting pressure on the environment across England and Wales. To help address these challenges, a new Evidence and Performance team has been created within Ofwat to enhance Ofwat’s environmental assessment and monitoring capabilities.
Recycling company fined £3 million after a man died and another was seriously injured while decommissioning a North Sea gas rig.
Stephen Picken, 62, and Mark Kumar were working for Veolia ES (UK) Limited at an onshore facility in Great Yarmouth.
Both men were working as demolition operatives also known as “Top Men”, undertaking the decommissioning and dismantlement of offshore structures.
Recycling Activity
On 17 October 2019, the two workers were removing an overhanging piece of metal pipework (known as a skirt pile), weighing in excess of 27 tonnes, from a jacket (a structure placed in the sea, designed to support oil and gas rig platforms), when it gave way. The pile struck the mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) containing the men, throwing them to the ground about 12 metres below.
Stephen Picken died at the scene and Mark Kumar suffered serious life-changing injuries.
Investigation
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified serious failings with the planning and the risk assessment which did not adequately cover the planned works. Shortcomings in supervision of the incident were also identified. The company did not risk assess the skirt pile being removed as it was considered low risk. As a result, there was no cutting plan or safe system of work for the skirt pile.
Demolition, dismantling and structural alteration work must be carefully planned and carried out – HSE has guidance on this which is available free here.
Recycling company fined £3 million
Veolia ES (UK) Limited of Pentonville Road, London, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. At a sentencing hearing at Ipswich Crown Court, on 22 July 2024, the company was fined £3,000,000 and ordered to pay £60,000 in costs.
After the hearing, HSE inspector David King said:
This incident, in an emerging industry, highlights the level of controls required to safely demolish what are large, dangerous structures. Veolia did not meet these standards and tragically one life was lost, and another forever changed. The Health and Safety Executive’s mission is to protect people and places. Organisations that endanger their employees by failing to meet the required standards, should be aware that we will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action.
A local authority has been sentenced after a school technician lost a finger while operating a machine.
A school technician at The Forest School in Horsham, lost his right index finger when it was sliced off by a circular bench saw on 13 June 2022.
The 29-year-old, who worked in the design and technology (DT) department, had been operating the saw to cut pieces of wood that were set to be used for a DT lesson. The school technician lost a finger in the accident.
While pushing one of the sheets of wood through the saw, the technician who was 27 at the time, felt a pain in his right index finger and immediately turned off the machine. As he looked down, he saw his finger lying on the bench.
A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found West Sussex County Council, the local authority in charge of the school, failed to ensure that the technician was trained to use the bench circular saw, as a result the school technician lost a finger. Whilst the technician had used the saw many times previously, he had not been trained on how to use it safely.
West Sussex County Council pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 9 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The local authority was fined £16,000, ordered to pay £4,294.60 in costs and a victim surcharge of £190 at Brighton Magistrates’ Court on 3 July 2024.
HSE inspector Russell Beckett said:
Workers must be trained properly when using high risk woodworking such as bench circular saws. This incident could have been prevented had West Sussex County Council provided [the technician] with proper training.
The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998
The above incident where a school technician lost a finger highlights the importance of training and other issues for workers using equipment. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, often abbreviated to PUWER, place duties on people and companies who own, operate or have control over work equipment. PUWER also places responsibilities on businesses and organisations whose employees use work equipment, whether owned by them or not. PUWER requires that equipment provided for use at work is:
suitable for the intended use
safe for use, maintained in a safe condition and inspected to ensure it is correctly installed and does not subsequently deteriorate
used only by people who have received adequate information, instruction and training – in the current case, the school technician lost a finger having not received any training in the safe use of the circular saw.
accompanied by suitable health and safety measures, such as protective devices and controls. These will normally include guarding, emergency stop devices, adequate means of isolation from sources of energy, clearly visible markings and warning devices
used in accordance with specific requirements, for mobile work equipment and power presses
If your business or organisation uses work equipment or is involved in providing work equipment for others to use (e.g. for hire), you must manage the risks from that equipment. This means you must:
ensure the equipment is constructed or adapted to be suitable for the purpose it is used or provided for
take account of the working conditions and health and safety risks in the workplace when selecting work equipment
ensure work equipment is only used for suitable purposes
ensure work equipment is maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair
where a machine has a maintenance log, keep this up to date
where the safety of work equipment depends on the manner of installation, it must be inspected after installation and before being put into use
where work equipment is exposed to deteriorating conditions liable to result in dangerous situations, it must be inspected to ensure faults are detected in good time so the risk to health and safety is managed
ensure that all people using, supervising or managing the use of work equipment are provided with adequate, clear health and safety information. This will include, where necessary, written instructions on its use and suitable equipment markings and warnings
ensure that all people who use, supervise or manage the use of work equipment have received adequate training, which should include the correct use of the equipment, the risks that may arise from its use and the precautions to take
where the use of work equipment is likely to involve a specific risk to health and safety (eg circular saw machine), ensure that the use of the equipment is restricted to those people trained and appointed to use it – in the current case where the school technician lost a finger, the local authority should have restricted access to those workers who had received training.
take effective measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery. This will normally be by fixed guarding but where routine access is needed, interlocked guards (sometimes with guard locking) may be needed to stop the movement of dangerous parts before a person can reach the danger zone. Where this is not possible, such as with the blade of a circular saw, it must be protected as far as possible and a safe system of work used. These protective measures should follow the hierarchy laid down in PUWER regulation 11(2) and the PUWER Approved Code of Practice and guidance or, for woodworking machinery, the Safe use of woodworking machinery: Approved Code of Practice and guidance
take measures to prevent or control the risks to people from parts and substances falling or being ejected from work equipment, or the rupture or disintegration of work equipment
ensure that the risks from very hot or cold temperatures from the work equipment or the material being processed or used are managed to prevent injury
ensure that work equipment is provided with appropriately identified controls for starting, stopping and controlling it, and that these control systems are safe
where appropriate, provide suitable means of isolating work equipment from all power sources (including electric, hydraulic, pneumatic and gravitational energy)
ensure work equipment is stabilised by clamping or otherwise to avoid injury
take appropriate measures to ensure maintenance operations on work equipment can be carried out safely while the equipment is shut down, without exposing people undertaking maintenance operations to risks to their health and safety
When providing new work equipment for use at work, you must ensure it conforms with the essential requirements of any relevant product supply law (for new machinery this means the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008). You must check it:
has appropriate conformity marking and is labelled with the manufacturer’s details
comes with a Declaration of Conformity
is provided with instructions in English
is free from obvious defects – and that it remains so during its working life
A Wellington dairy farmer pollution prosecution following incident after slurry entered watercourse.
A farmer has been given 14 weeks in prison suspended for a year and ordered to pay £10,000 costs after he persistently allowed slurry to run off into a stream near his farm.
David Bartlett, aged 70, of Upcott Dairy Farm, Sampford Arundel, Wellington, appeared for sentencing before District Judge Brereton at Taunton magistrates’ court on Thursday 18 July.
He had previously pleaded guilty to three offences relating to pollution to the Westford stream, a tributary of the River Tone. He was also ordered to pay £154 victim surcharge.
In a case brought by the Environment Agency, the court heard that the farm had a long history of failing to properly contain slurry and had been warned several times in the past for causing pollution of the Westford stream.
In October 2022, Agency officers installed remote monitoring equipment on the stream which confirmed regular pollution events were continuing to occur.
Using the data from the remote monitoring, officers went to the monitoring site in December 2022 where they found significant amounts of sewage fungus contaminating the bed of the watercourse, an indication of persistent pollution.
Pollution resulted in poor quality of water
Continuing upstream towards Upcott Dairy Farm, colonies of bloodworm were evident. These are a species of pollution tolerant organism associated with poor water quality. No invertebrate life forms were noted when stones in the stream bed were turned over, further indicating the poor quality of the water.
Near the farm, one of the officers saw a nearby ditch had suddenly started to discharge a significant amount of effluent with the appearance and smell of slurry. The source was quickly traced to an overflowing underground slurry tank on Upcott Dairy Farm.
Officers also investigated the system used for applying slurry to fields. Typically, farmers will use slurry to provide nutrients to their crops or grass. Bartlett was using a simple pipe to dispose of slurry in a single location.
Although not discharging slurry at the time of the pollution event inspection, it was clear there was significant contamination of slurry around the end of the pipe and evidence that slurry had tracked down the field toward the Westford stream.
A subsequent visit found slurry being pumped on to waterlogged land with no attempt to use the slurry for crop benefit. The slurry was several inches thick in the field indicating it had been pumped over a prolonged duration in the same location.
Toward the bottom of the field there was a significant build-up of mud and slurry either side of the gateway crossing the stream. This too presented a risk of further runoff pollution into the stream.
Pollution survey revealed stream affected for 2.5km
A biologist’s survey and report confirmed that the Westford stream had experienced repeated, acute and sustained chronic pollution events by slurry. Lack of slurry storage had led to slurry being pumped inappropriately on to a single patch of land where it was likely to run-off and cause pollution.
Bartlett had failed, despite repeated warnings, to install slurry storage facilities that would allow slurry to be stored during winter when ground conditions were unsuitable.
The report stated there had been “a significant negative impact on the aquatic invertebrate community and water quality along 2.5km of Westford stream.”
Bartlett submitted a statement to the Environment Agency in which he made limited admissions, implying others, such as his neighbour and the local authority were responsible. He denied deliberately pumping slurry into the watercourse.
Judge Brereton said there were significant aggravating features in the case, including Bartlett having previously been warned over causing pollution, his failure to carry out proper checks or make structural improvements by way of an adequate, compliant slurry storage system which is capable of storing slurry having received funds from the Rural Payments Agency to pay for infrastructure that would improve the environment and not cause significant, sustained pollution incidents.
Dairy farmer repeatedly ‘failed to acknowledge’ advice
David Womack of the Environment Agency said:
This farmer has, over the years, caused numerous pollution incidents and he has repeatedly failed to acknowledge the advice given or to improve the facilities for storing or properly using slurry.
For over 30 years there has been legislation in place requiring all livestock farmers to have storage facilities capable of storing a minimum of four months’ slurry production. The 2018 Reduction and prevention of Agricultural Diffuse Pollution Regulations now also require farmers to plan all applications of slurry in order to reduce the risk of pollution. Pumping slurry on to waterlogged land is unlawful and is likely to cause diffuse pollution.
We hope Mr Bartlett will now work with us to voluntarily improve the facilities at Upcott Dairy Farm. If he doesn’t, we won’t hesitate to use other legislative powers to reduce the risk of further pollution
Pollution prosecution charges
The charges against the defendant were:
On and before the 2 December 2022 you, David Bartlett, did cause an unpermitted water discharge activity, namely the discharge of poisonous, noxious or polluting matter from Upcott Dairy Farm, Sampford Arundel, Wellington, Somerset, into inland fresh waters contrary to Regulations 12(1)(b) and Regulation 38(1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016.
On and before the 2 December 2022 you, David Bartlett, a Land Manager did not ensure that organic matter, namely cattle slurry, was not applied to agricultural land that was waterlogged, flooded or snow covered in that you applied organic fertilizer to waterlogged ground contrary to Regulation 3(a) and 11 of the Reduction and prevention of Agricultural Diffuse Pollution (England) Regulations 2018
On and before the 2 December 2022 you, David Bartlett, a Land Manager did not ensure that for each application of organic or manufactured fertilizer to agricultural land, the application was planned so as not to give rise to a significant risk of agricultural diffuse pollution contrary to Regulation 4(1)(a)(ii) and 11 of the Reduction and Prevention of Agricultural Diffuse Pollution (England) Regulations 2018.
Prevent pollution with effective slurry management
Effective slurry management is crucial for both environmental sustainability and farm productivity. Here are some best practices for slurry management in the UK:
A company director fined after an employee was struck by an object while manufacturing large steel cable drums for the offshore industry.
The man, who is now 54, had been working for Code-A-Weld (Great Yarmouth) Limited when the incident happened on 19 November 2022. Although the company had manufactured steel drums previously, they had never manufactured drums of this size – with these ones weighing in excess of seven tonnes.
However, during the process, the jacking set-up failed at the company’s site in Harfreys Industrial Estate in Great Yarmouth which resulted in a catalogue of serious injuries including fractures to the man’s face and skull, and him losing the sight in one eye.
He was airlifted to hospital, placed into an induced coma and spent just under three weeks in hospital whereby he needed facial reconstruction surgery.
A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found that Code-A-Weld (Great Yarmouth) Limited failed (i) to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment; (ii) control risks from welding in confined spaces; and (iii) to provide the full training required.
The investigation also found that company director, David Fowler, failed to provide safe systems of work in relation to metal fabrication work, despite previous HSE interventions regarding failure to risk assess activities in the fabrication workshop.
Had the company put in place correct measures, such as suitable risk assessment, safe systems of work and planning for jacking activity, the incident could have been prevented.
The HSE publication, Health and safety in engineering workshops provides valuable practical advice and can be downloaded free at: Health and Safety in engineering workshops.
Following a sentencing hearing at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on 20 June 2024, DJ Williams issued their written judgment on 5 July as follows:
Company Fined
Code-A-Weld (Great Yarmouth) Limited, of Harfreys Industrial Estate, Bessemer Way, Great Yarmouth, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £24,000 and ordered to pay £3,500 in costs.
Director Fined
David Fowler, of Harfreys Industrial Estate, Bessemer Way, Great Yarmouth, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 37(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. He was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 in costs.
HSE Statement
Those in control of work have a responsibility to devise safe methods of working and to provide the necessary information, instruction and training to their workers in the safe system of working. If a suitable safe system of work had been in place prior to the incident, the life-threatening injuries sustained by the employee could have been prevented.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
