of
EDINBURGH BRANCH
25th Meeting
Dewar Centre, Glover Street, Perth
7.30 pm Thursday 3rd November 2005.
1. Chairperson Karen McDonnell
Karen opened the meeting a little after 7.30pm - the delay being caused as people patiently queued to append their names to the Sederunt. She welcomed the impressive number of IOSH members and guests – some from Perth Council - who had turned up for the meeting. Karen then went on to outline the emergency and administrative details pertaining to the Dewar Centre.
Karen also took the opportunity in her opening remarks to inform the meeting and offer congratulations to Andy Stark who has recently been appointed as a Trustee to the Board of Management of the Institution (IOSH).
2. Minutes of the previous Meeting (1st September 2005)
The Secretary – Dick Mann – informed the meeting that, in addition to Minutes e-mailed out, some copies had been distributed in the room for perusal. He also thanked Neil Doherty for pointing out that the Sederunt for the 1st September had not listed the Chairperson’s presence (Oops!). This Minute records that omission. Other comments on the Minutes were invited, but none received and so it was proposed that the Minutes be accepted as a true record of that meeting.
Proposed: Sandy Chisholm Seconded: Bob Stainton
The Secretary informed the meeting that two e-mail addresses were still causing difficulties. They are:
He requested that if any person recognised these addresses or knew the addressees could they get in contact with either the Secretary or the person concerned so that correct addressing can be established.
4. Correspondence
The Secretary informed the meeting that Nick Broom – Vice Chair for the North of Scotland Branch of IOSH is driving forward a proposal that representatives from the various Branches and Districts throughout Scotland should set up regular co-ordinating meetings in order to demonstrate common purpose and enthusiasm north of the border in support of IOSH. Leicester approves of this initiative.
IOSH Leicester is looking for somebody who might represent IOSH at a half-day event in Perth on the 14th November at the launch of a two-week campaign period to reduce the number of accidents involving ladders. Ideally they would like someone not from a large-scale construction organisation, instead someone experienced in fitting-out or other sector where many tasks are traditionally carried out from ladders.
Ian Waldram has the relevant paperwork. Anyone interested can get further details through the Secretary. (Secretary’s note: no approaches were made through the Secretary after the meeting).
5. Branch Liaison Karen McDonnell
Karen restated that Headquarters in Leicester were very keen to raise IOSH’s profile both throughout the UK and overseas. It was agreed that the District should play its part. One way of doing this was to invite guests to our meetings; in particular we should contact the Perthshire Chamber of Commerce with details of future meetings. (The District is now a Member of the Perthshire Chamber). The Secretary has been tasked with e-mailing the Chamber with our future meeting programme for the season 2005 / 2006.
Karen also requested that, if any District members were about to achieve Chartered Practitioner status, would they inform the Committee so that the fact could be publicised.
Neil Doherty raised a point in regard to the previous topic – raising the profile of IOSH and District activities. He wondered if it might be possible for details of our proceedings at meetings to be relayed to the Branch in Edinburgh in time for the Branch meetings that take place soon after the District’s. Could details be gotten to Max Bancroft – the Branch Secretary? The Chairperson – Karen McDonnell – responded that she would talk to Max Bancroft about this.
Further to information given by the Chairperson at the last meeting in regard to copies of the Practitioner (SHP) Magazine being made available for meeting guests to peruse; Karen stated that Nicky Howard at Leicester was to formally propose this idea to IOSH.
7. Guest Speaker
Steven Boucher – MIOSH, RSP, Dip OSHEM
Of Camerons Ltd. Architects/ Planning Supervisors and Health and Safety Services.
The Speaker for the evening, Steve Boucher, Director of Cameron’s Ltd, updated the audience on the forthcoming new CDM Regulations 2006 and their implications for the construction industry with an emphasis on the roles of the Client and the Co-ordinator, who replaces the Planning Supervisor of the 1994 Regulations. Steve drew on his extensive practical experience of advising clients in the Borders Region and his work as a Planning Supervisor to give his own views on the impact of the changes, while showing overheads detailing the draft guidance from the Consultative Document.
Outlining firstly some obvious changes:
1. The definition of a notifiable project is simplified to remove the contentious “more than 4 people on site at any time” clause, otherwise little change.
2. Clients must make sure that all the Co-ordinator’s duties described in Regulation 13 are carried out properly.
3. A Co-ordinator must be appointed before design work, planning or other preparatory work commences.
4. Some limitation of the time for completing the Health and Safety File
The new Regulations seek to improve the management of construction work by requiring the implementation of project and risk management at an early stage. There is recognition of the power of the client’s “directing mind” and his need to allow adequate money, time, competence and expertise to be applied at all stages of the work.
The changes place greater responsibilities on the Client, including the need to appoint a competent and adequately empowered Co-ordinator at the earliest stage of the project before any design work is carried out. This gives the Co-ordinator increased opportunity to influence the designing-out of factors which might adversely affect health and safety and to ensure that the project is properly managed from the start. The skills and competencies needed for a Co-ordinator are wider and deeper than those required for Planning Supervisors. This has raised some concerns among existing incumbents about their increased liabilities.
Until the Client has appointed a Co-ordinator they remain legally responsible for the compliance of the project, so, should they approach Designers to carry out design work they need to remind the Client of their duties under the Regulations to notify HSE and appoint a competent Co-ordinator before any work (including design) is carried out. When the project is non-notifiable the Client still has to appoint competent contractors and designers and give adequate time and resource to it. Clients must also be careful not to unwittingly assume the role of Designer through specifying, for example, materials or methods to be used, otherwise they can be liable for health and safety defects thereby incurred.
Clients have an ongoing responsibility to ensure continued reasonable management arrangements, in other words they cannot make appointments and walk away from liability. They have to advise all affected parties of the relevant hazards and other information such as site survey information that is necessary for the job. While a few may do this themselves, many will rely on advice from their Co-ordinator. Clients need to appoint a competent Principal Contractor (PC) early enough to allow him time to plan the construction work properly and they must ensue that the PC does not start work until the PC has prepared a suitable Health and Safety Plan and welfare facilities are in place. Clients have to ensure that good communications continue and that the project is monitored and reviewed, though they may do this through the agency of their Co-ordinator while remaining responsible for it. They have to decide the format of the Health and Safety File, make sure that it is compiled with relevant information, and ensure co-operation with any neighbouring or interfacing sites.
It is recognised that many Clients will want the Co-ordinator to do all these things for them, so it will be essential for clients to be able to select a Co-ordinator who is competent and on whom they can rely. Clients may well need help to determine whether the tendering Co-ordinators are competent. The wider, longer role of the Co-ordinator involving much more time on the job will cost more and therefore fees for these services will increase with contingent effects on overall building costs. Co-ordinators need to be empowered and adequately resourced by the client to do their job effectively; yet because the Client continues to have responsibility for the project they cannot be pushed aside entirely by the Co-ordinator.
Steve concluded with the thoughts that good Co-ordinators would be in short supply and would be expensive.
Questions from the audience showed a certain doubt that Clients would change to providing sufficient time and resource for projects just due to new regulations, although all hoped that the duty holders would be more transparent and that paperwork would become thinner and more relevant to the project.
8. Vote of Thanks Andy Stark
Andy Stark gave the vote of thanks for an enthusiastic and thought-provoking talk based on real world experience. After due applause, Karen McDonnell presented Steven a gift on behalf of the District.
9. Next Meeting
The next Meeting – and the Annual General Meeting (AGM) will be held on Thursday 2nd February 2006 at 7.30 pm in the Dewar Centre. The Guest Speaker will come from the Higher Performers Forum (a ROSPA initiative) and the talk topic will be Developing our Safety Influence Beyond the Workplace.