The Committee has since reported on Government failures in balancing risk across many aspects of its response to the pandemic, and lack of planning and preparedness despite an influenza pandemic having been identified as the UK’s top non-malicious risk on government’s National Risk Register since 2008.
This follow up inquiry is based on the NAO’s recent findings that Government was not fully prepared for the wide-ranging impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on society, the economy and essential public services, and did not act upon some warnings from the simulations carried out prior to COVID-19, which highlighted issues around planning, coordination and capability that apply to pandemics more broadly.
For example, PAC says that the Government lacked detailed plans on shielding, employment support schemes and managing the disruption to schooling. Departments’ pandemic plans and business continuity plans set out some, but not all, of the responses required to maintain operations during the pandemic.
Preparations for EU exit enhanced the crisis capabilities and risk planning of some departments but meant that government paused work on other emergency preparations, limiting its ability to focus on other risk and contingency planning at the same time.
During this inquiry, the Committee will question senior officials at DHSC and the Cabinet Office. The inquiry is currently accepting evidence. The Committee is inviting views, and welcome submissions from anyone with answers to the questions in the call for evidence. Evidence may be submitted until 5 January 2022.
This is valid as of 6th December 2021.
On 27 March 2020, two employees used brake cleaning fluid to clean the grease from the walls of a vehicle inspection pit in the workshop. Shortly after they had finished cleaning the walls there was a loud bang and the entire wall of the pit where the brake cleaner had been applied became engulfed in flames.
One employee managed to get out of the pit and ran to help his colleague whose clothing had caught fire, pulling him out of the pit and extinguishing the flames. Both employees received burns to their hands and legs. One sustained 60% burns and had to undergo an emergency surgical procedure to relieve the pressure from the swelling which involved cutting either side of his shins on both legs and his left knuckle going down to his wrist. He subsequently underwent five skin graft operations on his left hand and both legs and spent six weeks in hospital.
The HSE investigation into the incident, which occurred at STA Vehicle Centres Ltd in Starley Way, Birmingham, found that the company failed to carry out a risk assessment to consider whether it was possible to eliminate or reduce the risk. They had not considered replacing the dangerous substance with another non-flammable substance or using a different work process. Jet-washing, a safe alternative, was already in use at the company’s other site.
The employees were not aware of the increased risks associated with using flammable fluid in a poorly ventilated area nor the need for appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to be worn.
STA Vehicle Centres Limited of Halesfield 22, Telford pleaded guilty to breaching Section 6 (1) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002. They were fined £28,000 and ordered to pay costs of £926.17.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Charlotte Cunniffe said: “Employers should ensure flammable materials are used appropriately and provide training for employees in their correct use. This incident could have easily been prevented.”
This is valid as of 2nd December 2021.
What you’ll get: London Fire Brigade inspectors found serious fire safety defects during two visits to a five-storey building on Danbury Street in Islington, which is managed by Eurolets (UK) Limited.
An Enforcement Notice requiring the company to address the concerns was issued following a visit in 2016, which was subsequently sufficiently complied with. However, a later visit then found similar defects to the previous inspection.
The building consists of more than 40 self-contained flats let out to tenants and the inspections revealed deficiencies including:
• combustible material near the entrance to the premises
• lack of fire extinguishers and signage
• doors wedged open
• holes within the walls and a non-functioning fire alarm.
Eurolets was charged with 10 separate offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order and the company entered guilty pleas to all charges.
The judge found that the company fell far short of the appropriate standards and there was serious and/or systemic failure within the organisation to address risks.
The Brigade’s Assistant Commissioner for Fire Safety, Paul Jennings, said: “The combined effect of the deficiencies was that if a fire had started, there was a risk of an uncontrolled spread of heat, and smoke and flames affecting the whole premises, coupled with the only means of escape being overcome with smoke.
“In sentencing, the judge made it clear that she increased the fine because of the large number of residents that had been put at risk by the company’s lack of action to address concerns.
“We are pleased with the outcome of this case, which is thanks to the hard work which is done every day by our fire safety inspectors. It should also serve as a warning to property managers that we will take action where people are not taking their responsibilities seriously.
“There’s no excuse for leaving people’s safety to chance, especially when information is so readily available to those with responsibility for safety in buildings to understand what their duties are and ensure they comply with the law.”
Eurolets was charged with the below offences, entering a guilty plea to all. Failure to:
• take general fire precautions
• have a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment
• ensure appropriate fire arrangements
• ensure exit routes were clear and unlocked
• ensure appropriate fire safety measures in place and conveyed to employees and residents
• maintain and ensure fire safety equipment
• provide employees with sufficient fire safety information
• provide adequate safety training
• ensure adequate structural compartmentation.
• A further charge in respect of combustible items in the second inspection
Eurolets was ordered to pay a fine of £60,000 on the first charge (with no separate penalties for the remaining charges), a victim surcharge of £170 and costs of £20,000. The total of £80,170 is to be paid over 10 months at a rate of £8,000 a month.
This is valid as of 1st December 2021.
Named after PC Andrew Harper, who was killed in the line of duty in 2019, the law will introduce mandatory life sentences for anyone convicted of killing an emergency worker whilst committing a crime.
The move follows an unwavering campaign by Andrew’s family, including his widow Lissie, and the Police Federation, and comes after a number of meetings with the Justice Secretary and Home Secretary.
Henry Long, Jessie Cole and Albert Bowers each received custodial sentences of between 13 and 19 years in prison for PC Harper’s manslaughter. An appeal by the Attorney General to increase their time behind bars was rejected.
The government says that ministers are determined to make sure that punishments fit the severity of the crime and are determined to introduce the law as soon as possible.
The move extends mandatory life sentences to anyone who commits the manslaughter of an emergency worker on duty – including police, prison officers, firefighters and paramedics – while carrying out another crime unless there are truly exceptional circumstances. Courts must already impose life sentences for murder, with a whole-life order being the starting point if the victim is a police officer.
Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Dominic Raab said: “We are going to pass into law mandatory life sentences for those who unlawfully kill an emergency worker in the course of their duty. I pay tribute to Lissie Harper’s remarkable campaign.
“This government is on the side of victims and their families and we want our emergency services to know that we’ll always have their back.”
Home Secretary, Priti Patel, said: “PC Andrew Harper’s killing was shocking. As well as a committed police officer, he was a husband and a son. It is with thanks to the dedication of Lissie and his family that I am proud to be able to honour Andrew’s life by introducing Harper’s Law.
“Those who seek to harm our emergency service workers represent the very worst of humanity and it is right that future killers be stripped of the freedom to walk our streets with a life sentence.”
The move follows recent government action to protect police, prison officers, firefighters and paramedics and ensure those who seek to harm them feel the full force of the law. This includes plans to double the maximum penalty for assaulting them to two years’ imprisonment.
The changes will mean that those who kill an emergency worker while committing an offence will face a mandatory life sentence. The emergency worker does not need to be aware that that offence had taken place or be responding directly to it. Judges will have the option to impose a different sentence in exceptional circumstances if there are exceptional circumstances which relate to the offender or the offence which would make it unjust to apply the minimum sentence.
It will cover those emergency workers as defined in the same way by in the Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 and in section 68 of the Sentencing Code who were acting in the exercise of their functions. This includes police officers, National Crime Agency officers, prison officers, custody officers, firefighters and paramedics.
This is valid as of 30th November 2021.
What you’ll get: It is already illegal to text or make a phone call (other than in an emergency) using a hand-held device while driving. Next year, laws will go further to ban drivers from using their phones to take photos or videos, scroll through playlists or play games.
This will mean anyone caught using their hand-held device while driving will face a £200 fixed penalty notice and 6 points on their licence.
Drivers will still be able to continue using a device ‘hands-free’ while driving, such as a sat-nav, if it’s secured in a cradle. They must, however, always take responsibility for their driving and can be charged with an offence if the police find them not to be in proper control of their vehicle.
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said: “Too many deaths and injuries occur while mobile phones are being held.
“By making it easier to prosecute people illegally using their phone at the wheel, we are ensuring the law is brought into the 21st century while further protecting all road users.
“While our roads remain among the safest in the world, we will continue working tirelessly to make them safer, including through our award-winning THINK! campaign, which challenges social norms among high-risk drivers.”
Following the public consultation, the government will revise The Highway Code to explain the new measures. It will also be more precise about the fact that being stationary in traffic counts as driving, making it clear that hand-held mobile phone use at traffic lights or in motorway jams is illegal except in very limited circumstances.
There will be an exemption to the new law for drivers making a contactless payment using their mobile phone while stationary to ensure the law keeps pace with technology.
This exemption will cover, for example, places like a drive-through restaurant or a road toll and will only apply when payment is being made with a card reader. It will not allow motorists to make general online payments while driving.
This is valid as of 29th November 2021.
What you’ll get: The teenager was working with his employer, Dominic Di Pasquale, cutting down trees at a home in Pollokshields West, Glasgow on 19 March 2018.
Di Pasquale, a sole trader from Motherwell, was felling trees with a chainsaw and his employee was picking up the branches.
One of the branches he picked up hadn’t been cut yet. As Di Pasquale continued to cut it, the chainsaw jammed, pulling the branch and the teenager’s arm towards it. The chainsaw cut deep into his right hand along his knuckles from his index finger to his pinkie.
The teenager was taken to hospital by Di Pasquale, where he underwent surgery on his hand. He has since had three more operations to try and restore the use of his hand and has spent much of the last three years in casts.
The injury has left the teenager struggling to tie his shoelaces and he cannot use a keyboard. He has been advised to use an adapted steering wheel for driving.
When the employee started working with Di Pasquale, he wasn’t given any training. There also wasn’t a suitable system of work in place to make sure the employees stayed a safe distance from each other.
Di Pasquale plead guilty to failings under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £10,000.
Alistair Duncan, Head of the Health and Safety Investigation Unit, said: “This young man was left with a painful injury that has affected his dexterity and mental health, and had a life changing impact. If he had received basic training, this accident could well have been prevented.
“Dominic Di Pasquale put his employee at unacceptable risk and this prosecution should remind other employers they will be held accountable for their failures.”
This is valid as of 25th November 2021.
Rail regulator, the Office of Rail and Road, brought the prosecution under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 for failure to ensure lifting operations involving lifting equipment were properly planned, supervised, and carried out in a safe manner.
Amey Rail Limited pleaded guilty to the offence.
ORR’s prosecution follows an investigation into an incident in the early hours of 21 October 2018 outside Market Harborough station on the Midland Main Line, when a road-rail excavator vehicle overturned during an unsafe lift.
The vehicle’s operator had to be pulled from the cab, and fortunately, despite several other rail workers being in the area of the overturning, no one was seriously injured.
ORR’s investigation into the incident found there was a late change in the equipment being used on the night of the accident, which had inadequate lifting capacity for the planned works.
To overcome this, it was established that the length of the track to be lifted would need to be reduced from 30 to 20 feet.
This critical change was not managed or communicated correctly and resulted in the track panels being cut to the original length of 30 feet – exceeding the capacity for the excavators to be used.
When lifting started, the on-board safety systems on the excavators showed that the weight being lifted was exceeding what excavators could safely handle. ORR found in its investigation that these warnings were ignored, and the safety systems were disabled to enable the work to continue.
ORR also found that radio-based communication system between the operators and the lifting supervisor developed a defect. Despite replacement equipment being available on site, work continued with the inadequate communications equipment.
These failures led to one of the two excavators becoming overloaded beyond its capacity and toppling onto its side, trapping a worker in the cab, when undertaking a tandem lift of a track panel later established to be 39ft long.
Several members of the lifting team and others in the nearby vicinity kicked through the toughened glass windscreen to drag a worker clear of the cab.
ORR’s HM Chief Inspector of Railways Ian Prosser CBE, said: “The risks of failing to comply with the lifting regulations are well known throughout the industry and clearly foreseeable. In this case basic errors were made and it is by sheer luck that no one was seriously hurt.
“None of these failures to follow well established procedures, nor the isolation of safety systems on the excavators, were identified despite the presence of two senior members of staff on site during the night to manage the work.
“This meant Amey failed to take measures in order to adequately manage the risks presented when tandem lifting loads of the size and weight of those undertaken on 21 October 2018.”
This is valid as of 24th November 2021.
What you’ll get: While the full impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is yet to be fully understood, mental health issues are the number one reason given for sick days in the UK.
According to the Regulator, last year more than 17 million working days were lost as a result of stress, anxiety, or depression. A recent survey by the charity Mind suggests that two in five employees’ mental health had worsened during the pandemic.
In response, the HSE has launched a new campaign, Working Minds, which aims to help businesses recognise the signs of work-related stress and make tackling issues routine.
While Working Minds is specifically targeting six million workers in small businesses, the HSE is calling for a culture change across Britain’s workplaces to ensure psychological risks are treated the same as physical ones in health and safety risk management.
HSE’s chief executive Sarah Albon said: “Work-related stress and poor mental health should be treated with the same significance as risks of poor physical health and injury. In terms of the effect it has on workers, significant and long-term stress can limit performance and impact personal lives.
“No worker should suffer in silence and if we don’t act now to improve workers’ mental health, this could evolve into a health and safety crisis.
“The pandemic has highlighted the need to protect the health of employees who have faced unprecedented challenges; the Government is committed to building back better and we want to make sure good mental health is central to this.”
HSE is reminding business that no matter where people work, employers have a legal duty to assess the risks in the workplace, not just in terms of potential hazards and physical safety. They should also promote good working practices. It says this promotes an open environment where employees can share their concerns and discuss options to ease pressures.
Sarah Albon added: “Our campaign is focused on giving employers a clear reminder of their duties while championing reducing work-related stress and promoting good mental health at work.”
The regulator has partnered with a number of organisations to highlight the triggers of stress, the legal duty of employers and how to manage the risks. The network of Working Minds champions includes the charity Mind, which supports and empowers anyone experiencing a mental health problem in England.
Working Minds is aimed specifically at supporting small businesses by providing employers and workers with easy to implement advice, including simple steps in its ‘5 Rs’ to:
1. Reach out
2. Recognise
3. Respond
4. Reflect
5. make it Routine.
Employers and workers wanting to know more about the Working Minds campaign, including the legal obligations, advice, and tools available, should visit the campaign’s website here.
This is valid as of 23rd November 2021.
What you’ll get: Deputy Commissioner Paul Jennings said there are “hundreds, if not thousands” of new buildings which may be “deliberately” designed to avoid rules.
They include blocks designed to be lower than the 18 m (59 ft.) limit to be considered a higher-risk high-rise building.
The building safety minister branded efforts to “cut corners” as “shocking”.
Speaking to BBC Newsnight recently, Mr. Jennings, said: “We have got examples where we think people are deliberately designing and building their buildings below that 18-metre, six-floor threshold, because they know if they reach that threshold, they would have to put advanced and more intricate fire safety measures in.”
Mr. Jennings described these new buildings in the capital as examples of “gaming the system”.
“We are seeing around 60% of the building consultations that come into the fire engineering team and others are ones where we are going backwards,” he said.
The Housebuilders Federation, which represents housing developers, told Newsnight: “Developers meet the building regulations set by Government without exception”.
Recently, London Fire Brigade said all but three of the recommendations made by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry will be in place by 2022.
Last Monday, Michael Gove told the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee: “We collectively – the department, some in local government, others in the private sector – failed people at Grenfell and there are people who were and still are in buildings where there is a significant risk.”
This is valid as of 22nd November 2021.
What you’ll get: Shane Leech, 33, pleaded guilty to these offences. He was given a 12-month community order and must carry out 80 hours of unpaid work.
On 15 September 2020, a report was made by a member of the public to Natural England of a dead buzzard and pigeon near Lakenheath, Suffolk. The birds were collected and sent for forensic testing and results showed that the partially plucked pigeon had Bendiocarb residue, a highly toxic chemical to be used against insects, on its body. The buzzard had Bendiocarb residue in its stomach and it is likely that the buzzard died after eating the pigeon carcass.
There was insufficient evidence to prove Mr. Leech was the one who put out poisoned bait or killed the buzzard. A search of Leech’s home on the 18 January 2021 found two 3kg containers of Bendiocarb.
In a search of an outbuilding on Leech’s property, around thirty dead pheasants were laying on the floor of the building. There were no health and safety warnings stating that insecticide chemicals were being stored anywhere on Leech’s property. Furthermore, the search also showed that Leech had two shotguns in an unlocked room.
Suffolk Police reported the case to the CPS who then undertook a review of evidence and authorized charges against Leech for breaches of health and safety and firearm licenses.
Ashley Petchey, of the CPS, said: “Shane Leech showed no responsibility for his actions. This case demonstrates the need to store chemicals securely and safely as failing to do so can have tragic circumstances, especially for wildlife in the countryside.
“Leech also failed to store two shotguns and ammunition properly, which could have endangered people’s lives. We will always work with the police to prosecute those who are endangering wildlife and our countryside.”
Leech was sentenced on 8 November 2021 at Ipswich Magistrates Court for two counts of failure to comply with a health and safety regulation and four counts of failing to comply with firearm licenses
Leech was sentenced to 12-month community order with 80 hours unpaid work, £105 in legal costs and £95 Victim Surcharge. Leech also had to forfeit the stored chemicals.
This is valid as of 18th November 2021.
On 22 May 2019, the employee was replacing broken roof sheets using a mobile elevating working platform (MEWP) to gain access to the roof of the barn and crawling boards to traverse the roof. The employee’s foot slipped from one of the crawling boards and he subsequently fell through the fragile roof material, sustaining serious injuries including neck fractures, a collapsed lung, and a bleed on the brain.
The HSE’s investigation found that Trevor Cook Construction Limited failed to plan the work appropriately. The company was aware of the risks and often used netting when undertaking large re-roofing projects but made a conscious decision not to install nets for smaller jobs, which involved the replacement of individual roof sheets. The chances of falling whilst working on fragile roofs are very high and the company should have had the appropriate safeguards in place.
Trevor Cook Construction Limited of Garlands, Cadley Road, Collingbourne Ducis, Marlborough, Wiltshire pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £63,278 and ordered to pay costs of £6,721.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Stephan Axt-Simmonds said: “Falls from height remain one of the most common causes of work-related fatalities in this country and the risks associated with working at height are well known.
“Falls through fragile roof materials are not inevitable. They can be prevented by careful planning, using trained and experienced workers with suitable equipment, and employing a high level of supervision. This incident could so easily have been avoided by using established control measures and safe working practices.”
This is valid as of 17th November 2021.
What you’ll get: A survey of UK office workers claims that 80% would feel more positive about a return to a five-day office week if action was taken to measure and improve the quality of air in their workplace.
The survey, The Air That We Breathe, canvassed the views of 200 people aged between 25 and 55 who work in offices across a variety of UK business sectors. It was conducted by communications consultancy JPES Partners whose Head of Property, Duncan Lamb, comments: “The survey responses made it clear just how much the pandemic has focused people’s thinking on the issue, with 86% of respondents saying that the issue of air quality in the workplace is now more important to them.
“Accordingly, it’s now a factor which is influencing people’s willingness to return to the office environment and needs to be addressed by all businesses – and not just those which are office-based.”
Currently, there is little evidence that employers are actively engaging with issue: less than a third of those surveyed reported that their employer had taken measures to improve the air quality of their workplace during the past year.
The research’s author, Stephen Collins, reports: “Examples of basic measures which had been taken included employers who have simply put more space between workstations with some even moving to larger buildings to make this strategy possible.
“Of the more positive comments, one respondent noted that their employer had added filters to the air conditioning units while another reported that air quality levels were now tested daily.”
The presence of air quality monitors would go some way to reassuring workers: 88% of those surveyed said that air quality measurement at workplaces should become mandatory.
The effects of poor air quality has been scientifically proven to be linked to life-reducing illnesses and lowered cognitive function. Air quality is measured with an Air Quality Index which shows changes in the amount of pollution in the air and particularly the presence of airborne particulate matter which is measured on the PM scale.
It is also becoming an issue for property landlords and developers. Whereas occupier attitudes to their environment previously focused predominantly on temperature and light levels, the quality of air in a workplace or, indeed, any publicly shared enclosed space is fast becoming a matter for scrutiny.
Duncan Lamb comments: “It’s a substantial challenge for the owners of existing buildings that will need to be adapted if they are to meet higher expectations around air quality. For new developments, the issue is perhaps more straightforward but for all types of asset there is likely to be an additional layer of cost as more intensive and sophisticated systems have to be put in place.
“However, on the upside, it’s clear that engaging with the issue can contribute positively to the marketability of a workplace and also its long-term asset value.”
This is valid as of 16th November 2021.
What you’ll get: Free downloads, advance notice of webinars, product updates and perks – all straight to your inbox.