1. USHA Autumn Seminar in association with AUDE A Presentation by Richard Habgood APS President Thursday, 12 th September 2013

2. The origins of Safety in Design What is Construction Health & Safety Risk Management?

3. Who/What is the Association for Project Safety? The Association for Project Safety (formerly the Association of Planning Supervisors) was incorporated in January 1995 in response to the introduction of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations [CDM1994] which was our government’s interpretation of the European Council Directive 92/57/EEC of 24 June 1992 on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites.

4. Safety in Design Why the introduction of the European Directive? Arising from a pan European study in 1989 that had examined data collected on construction accidents, this study concluded that of the 1,413 fatalities and 750,000 major accidents examined, 63% were attributable to decisions taken before work on site commenced i.e. unsafe design (35%) and poor planning (28%). One of the aims of the Directive was to address this situation.

5. And so CDM1994 was introduced into the UK – these new regulations placed new duties upon clients, designers and contractors of construction projects to rethink their approach to health and safety. And for it be co-ordinated and managed effectively through all stages of a construction project: concept, design, on site and then subsequent maintenance and repair. The regulations created the Planning Supervisor as the duty holder in the construction project team charged with ensuring that the main planks of “risk reduction” – were put in place and with overall responsibility to do just this the co-ordination of health and safety aspects of the design and planning phase for construction projects.

6. APS is the leading multi-disciplinary membership body in the UK for individuals and organisations involved in the design, planning and managing of construction projects as defined in our current Construction (Design & Management) Regulations introduced in 2007 and we are committed to shaping and sharing best practice in construction health and safety risk management.

7. Where we are today? As the UK’s leading home for CDM Co-ordinators, APS underpins the ethos behind our CDM regulations - the integration and consideration of health and safety into the management of construction projects by all duty holders in order to: (a)improve the planning and management of projects from the very start; (b)identify risks early on, so they can be eliminated or reduced at the design or planning stage and the remaining risks can be properly managed; (c)target effort where it can do the most good in terms of health and safety; and (d)discourage unnecessary bureaucracy. AND WHEN THE NEW REGULATIONS COME INTO FORCE IN SOME 12 MONTHS TIME I’M SURE THIS WILL CONTINUE

8. Today’s Topic CDM 2014 and just where we are

9. Background Early evaluation of CDM 2007 Evaluation –Research –CONIAC WG –Other contributions ( eg LÖFSTEDT) Key points from research –aims of CDM 2007 largely met –concerns: application and interpretation coordination bureaucracy –ACoP - effectiveness

10. Background Other factors: –Industry development and change –continuing poor performance on small/medium sites Under-implementation of TMCSD Government policy on regulation –“copy out” –one in one out / extending to one in up to four out –reform of the h&s culture HSE Board Dec 2011: –Revised Regulatory package –Based on copy out of TMCSD –Continue improvement in health and safety outcomes –Workable, comprehensible package – Regulations/ACOP/Guidance –Consider under implementation of TMCSD

11. Principles Maintain/improve worker and others protection Retention of technical standards Getting the framework right: –Construction phase requirements little/no change –Preconstruction phase – make it work better –Cross cutting issues – do they add value? Consider case for retaining requirements going beyond the Directive

12. Themes Co-ordination Competence –Corporate –Individual Changing thresholds Designers ACoP and supporting material

13. Co-ordination Effect of transferring pre-construction co- ordination role to ‘lead or the principal designer’ How can the co-ordination role best be delivered to add value not cost? What would good co-ordination look like on large/small sites? What material would be needed to support the co-ordination role better?

14. Competence To what extent do Regulations drive the competence agenda? What would be the effect of removing it from statute? What would replace it ?

15. Competence - corporate Would the removal of Regulation 4 and Appendix 4 change industry practice? If so, how? Does the existing PQQ process add value? How could the industry better assure contractor competence?

16. Competence - individual What currently drives the worker competence agenda? Would the removal of Regulation 4 change industry practice? If so, how? What would the industry need to do in response?

17. Changing thresholds What motivates small sites to do what they do? What does co-ordination mean on small sites? What should H&S plans look like on small sites? Any views on notification threshold?

18. Designers Is there an appetite for designers to take on co- ordination? Is reasonable practicability an issue? Is passing on information more important than designing out risk ?

19. ACoP and supporting material Does the ACoP motivate the industry? ACoP: retain, revise, review? What would replace? Who/how should it be written?

20. Thank you Any further questions