Farmers plead for common sense over health and safety

Hugh Pearse owner of Hawea Farms in Elsthrope is organising a farmers' meeting to raise concerns over the safety issue with farm quad bikes.

Safety in the workplace is paramount and in pursuing that safety, rules and regulations are needed. But across the working landscape there is a growing concern that the rules are becoming overly restrictive and have the potential to harm some businesses. It has reached the stage where the region's farmers are set to hold a mass meeting to raise concerns and seek answers.

Elsthorpe farmer Hugh Pearse, who runs Hawea Farm, was quick to make it very clear he had no issues with the two words "health" and "safety".

"Very important - you have to be very aware of safety and I'm right behind it," he said.

But he made it equally clear that there were three other words which carried more weight in his, and the farming fraternity's, minds.

"Consultation" and "common sense".

He said the wearing of helmets and carrying a passenger aboard a quad bike, in any situation, was effectively a case of over-regulation and was something of an "iron-fisted" approach.

The strict WorkSafe adherence meant if he had to travel on perfectly flat terrain with no hazards 50m from his house to a nearby shed to go and feed the dogs he had to put a helmet on.

And under no circumstances could he have a passenger aboard.

Getting a hired fencing contractor out to an isolated spot was now a no-no.

"It's not as if I'm going to go up a steep bluff with someone aboard and tip it over."

One of his farming colleagues at Kahuranaki, Paul Robinson, often staged events such as dog trials and having a quad to get people out to some areas for them was now, under the restrictions, not a goer.

Mr Robinson has joined Mr Pearse in organising a meeting for farmers to discuss their concerns over the work and safety constraints.

It will be staged at the Havelock North Club on July 8 and Mr Pearse said he hoped for a turn-out "bursting at the seams".

"We have to be safety conscious but it needs to be left to the farmers to manage risk assessment," Mr Pearse said.

"We don't want them coming out and telling us what to do," he said, adding he doubted many of those who steered the recommendations for tougher new work safety rules had stepped foot on a farm.

Regulations such as those targeting quad bikes added a "hell of a cost unnecessarily" to farming.

The industry could be tough at the best of times, and while farmers on Crown properties were likely to be in the position to sell the quad and buy a "side-by-side" machine which could take a passenger, most smaller-scale farmers were not.

It came down to common sense, he said.

"Anyone who comes on to your property and you are liable - people have to take some responsibility for themselves."

Mr Pearse said regulations or not, there would always be quad bike accidents, and he and the rest of the farming fraternity were well aware of the safety issues and accordingly were right behind health and safety on farms, and across the general working landscape.

"But the issue is they are forcing regulations through - come and sit down and talk to us."

His stance was echoed by Federated Farmers health and safety spokesperson Katie Milne.

Farmers were concerned about safety.

"Of course the accident rate on farms is too high but WorkSafe has admitted that its drive to enforce wearing helmets over the past few years has not reduced the injury rate from farm quad accidents in the slightest," she said.

"We need a closer look at what is causing accidents on farms, and that includes injuries caused by stock, and how to avoid those injuries."

Ms Milne said a "regulatory obsession" with helmets was not going to do it.

Hawke's Bay Federated Farmers president Will Foley said the most frequent inquiry or question he took from farmers was about the whole health and safety issue.

"There is a real concern out there," he said.

While the current safety legislation had been in place since the early 90s, the degree of policing and implementing it on a greater scale had grown - irrespective of new legislation currently being drafted.

Mr Foley said there was an almost "bullying" nature from safety officers telling farmers how to go about their business.

"Both sides do not understand each other and there needs to be more meetings and consultation - farmers feel like it is coming at them thick and fast - they need to understand the farmers' point of view before going in and handing out big fines."

Mr Foley said all that had happened was that WorkSafe and the Government had put a big wall up.

Will Foley, Federated Farmers Hawke's Bay provincial president, is calling for more consultation between regulators and farmers over health and safety on farms. Photo / File

And rather than improve the whole situation, "they have achieved the opposite".

He said it was good to see the region's farmers rallying together for the meeting next month.

"To see them say 'come on, WorkSafe and Government - we don't like what we are seeing - we want some input'."

Tuki Tuki MP Craig Foss said he fully understood the concerns being raised and that there had been a "vacuum of uncertainty" since work on the new bill was sparked.

He said he had heard rumours about proposed strict new regulations circulating throughout the bush telegraph, but the fact the legislation had been delayed an extra two months so that all obligations could be balanced should give farmers, and everyone across the workplace landscape, comfort.

"This is not a case of Big Brother coming charging in - there is a long way to go yet."

He said until more certainty about the bill and what it contained came out, people needed to "taihoa" for the moment.

"But I fully understand their concerns."

However, Mr Foss said it was a fact that too many people were dying or being seriously injured in workplace accidents and some sectors of New Zealand industry did not have good safety records.

"Safety is safety - none of us on a farm ever think we are going to have an accident but, sadly, they happen and some are more preventable than others."

He said WorkSafe had worked in with Federated Farmers as well as other sectors, such as unions, and the pursuit of safety was being carefully drafted.

"A man with a clipboard chasing a farmer up the paddock - that's not going to happen."

Napier MP Stuart Nash said the vital ingredients of the issue were pragmatism and common sense.

"Safety in the workplace is so important and everyone should have the expectation that they come safe at the end of day - but there has to be a degree of pragmatism and the legislation should be about mitigating risk."

Mr Nash said as things stood there were areas that had stretched the whole issue of responsibility.

Such as farmers shouldering the responsibility for people who went on to their properties - and that included hunters and walkers.

"That takes it a bit too far."

People did have to take personal responsibility for themselves, he said.

"You can't eliminate all the risks.'

He said it was also important that workers, if they felt there was a safety issue which concerned them, should be able to go to their employer and bring it up for discussion without fear or prejudice.

Mr Nash said he could understand the concerns of the farming community in particular.

Stricter H&S rules can still be good for business

Will adopting stricter health and safety regulations affect the bottom line for Kiwi businesses?

There are different schools of thought, says associate professor in occupational health and safety Ian Laird, who heads Massey Palmerston North's School of Public Health.

Certainly there have been discussions about harsher rules having a negative effect on some smaller businesses - but those are counteracted by case studies where larger companies with a focus on health and safety are found to thrive.

New legislation being drafted for parliamentary advancement is an adaptation of the model in use in Australia, and is being modified.

"There are a number of positions on this. I have anecdotally heard this is stifling business, because the regulations are too strict," Mr Laird said.

"Compliance costs for the health and safety regulations are a burden on smaller businesses. Those costs can be really quite prohibitive.

"On the other end of the spectrum if managed effectively it's good for business - you need to incorporate it within every aspect of what the organisation does."

The middle point of view is that part of being a good employer is being concerned about the well-being of staff - something often seen in boutique businesses.

A taskforce reviewing the health and safety system is still coming up with recommendations on the Australian framework which focuses on large enterprises and placing responsibility with boards and board directors.

The Government was searching for a review of our Health and Safety Employment Act, largely driven by the Pike River mining disaster, Mr Laird said.

"Any business from zero employees to 100 will have to follow these regulations, but the act is in large business-speak."

For those running smaller organisations the extra restrictions and resulting costs could be cause for complaint.

New Zealand was the only country where companies got levy incentives to meet minimum health and safety regulation, he added.

"Existing legislation identifies managing hazards. "The new one is the same except there is more responsibility on employers to do that. It's the new legislation that identifies clear responsibilities, which will be driving anxiety."

What do you think?

Comment below, email

letters@hbtoday.co.nz

or write letters to the editor to PO BOX180, Hastings, 4122.