AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

41" 'The issue of safety is itse

1st July 1993, Page 39
1st July 1993
Page 39
Page 39, 1st July 1993 — 41" 'The issue of safety is itse
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

another charade for whid no-one has been hung'

g egulations can increase costs and may reduce risks. Increased costs can produce benefits, but may reduce employment. There is a balance which needs to be struck.

I believe that UK Ltd has the wrong balance, especially in the world of Commercial Transport and in particular the Waste Disposal Industry.

In 1981 the Dangemus Substances (Conveyance by Road in Road Tankers and Containers) Regulation—SI 1059 (and now SI 743 1992)— came into force after literally years of costly discussions. These regulations affect, among other things, the design of Waste Tankers, increase their costs, and augment their weight.

At no stage in the discussions from 1972 was there any shred of evidence to suggest that the proposed regulations would reduce the incidence of accidents, nor is there any proof of serious accidents due to the transport of dangerous wastes.

Regulations were being formulated, and weights augmented (therefore journeys by road increased for the same volume) for no demonstrable safety benefit.

SI 1059 made reference to an Approved Code of Practice for the Design of Waste Tankers which is now due to become law in July 1993 (please note a 12-year delay following the regulation), but is as yet unavailable to the Industry following European Commission amendments—EC Directive 831189 giving Brussels the last word. So much for subsidiarity !

The sheer incompetence of any regulation of safety worth its salt taking so long to formulate is erl ipsed by the European factor which has been clearly evident for many years.

Common Market regulation, under the auspices of the United Nations (should it survive after Bosnia!) are, we are assured, being formulated around ADR (European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road) in 1995. These will yet again affect the design of waste tankers.

The UK delay was incompetent, expensive and tmnece:cary, that myth of "individual and national regulations being universal in 1993" was simply a political illusion, and the saga continues with the monster that perpetrated this pathetic mess (in the name of safety?) in place—even revitalised by the Brussels dimension— and totally out of any democratic control.

In reality the issue of safety is itself another charade for which no-one in the HSE, the Department of Transport or the Government has yet been hung.

In truth we have just increased ot unladen weights in the waste indusi this increases our journeys and pub the drivers of those lorries. At risk ri the waste they transport as the title regulation in question might sugge: risk from the hazards of road traffic where the records clearly show that HGV drivers are killed each year.

Had we put the safety of those &I at the top of our list back in 1972 th( now have safety belts fitted to their help protect them, and some 1,700 fi be alive today.

The machinery of central govern] been dancing for 21 years to the wrt at incredible costs to the commercia transport industry, to the wrong tur remorselessly continues to do so.

The regulators know these facts g not disagree with them, but the deal Government continues its relentless movement toward total regulation a and only, I fear, for their benefit.

Is this the way round that we real our regulations to operate?

Bureaucracy is literally killing us


comments powered by Disqus