BSIA calls on HSE to reduce burden over “counterproductive” accreditation

Concerns have been raised around the time-consuming and administratively costly processes often used as a barrier to entry on prospective customer sites, requiring an organisation to acquire and maintain multiple accreditations for the very same management system and paying for the privilege.

Prospective customers are pinning their colours to one scheme and not accepting other equally valid schemes, even though they’re assessing the same management system.

Based on feedback from its members, the BSIA believes there is ambivalence over whether these schemes are delivering on Health and Safety goals, with scant evidence of any tangible positive impact directly attributed to these schemes.

Underpinning reasons

The BSIA has identified that the current safety schemes appear “counterproductive, bureaucratic and costly” to many organisations for the following reasons:

*These schemes are more concerned about customer preference, dependent upon the procurement policy of their system

*Full management system (third party) UKAS certifications, such as ISO 45001, are being devalued and are not accepted by prospective customers

*Prospective customers view this as passing some of their Health and Safety responsibility (and all due diligence) on to others, with no need for due diligence on sub-contractors

*These accreditations detract from genuine safety performance as recognised by such bodies as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents

“Bureaucratic system”

Steve Lampett, technical manager at the BSIA, commented: “The Trade Association believes that the abundance of commercial safety schemes has turned accreditation into a huge bureaucratic system. It’s a box-ticking exercise that has little to do with genuine Health and Safety assessment and is, according to the Safety Schemes in Procurement website, supported by the HSE.”

Lampett added: “While the security industry is keen to demonstrate Best Practice, a passionate champion of Health and Safety and accepts its requirement for independent assessment, we believe these accreditations have exerted no positive impact on safety and are not working as intended. On that basis, we call upon the HSE to review its support for these schemes in line with our members’ valid concerns.”