Work safety rules under microscope

NOT FAIR: Wanganui builder Jamie O'Leary has hit out at inconsistent rules and cost across different consent authorities. PHOTOS/ STUART MUNRO 110615WCSMTASKFORCE3.JPG

About 30 people attended a meeting in Wanganui on Monday to vent their frustration at rules and regulations they felt were unfair and unnecessary hinderance.

They were mainly farmers and business people from the construction industry, but also community volunteers and planners, and inconsistencies in rules and enforcement, and the cost of compliance were among the gripes.

Whanganui MP Chester Borrows hosted the meeting - the local leg of the Rules Reduction Taskforce roadshow- at the War Memorial Centre.

The taskforce was set up by Local Government Minister Paula Bennett and is aimed at identifying rules and regulation that people feel are not necessary.

At Monday's meeting, people were concerned about workplace rules being applied to and affecting daily life, especially on farms which were both a work place and a home.

"I'm not laissez-faire about safety," Mr Borrows said. "I've probably attended more sudden deaths due to industrial accidents, farm accidents than anyone in the room - certainly anyone in Parliament.

"What I take huge exception to - and what I think the New Zealand public does - is the ridiculous enforcement of stupid laws that shouldn't be there in the first place, or the fact that every time someone has to be prosecuted or warned as opposed to having those things drawn to their attention."

Wanganui builder Jamie O'Leary said the cost and amount of information involved with getting a consent was not consistent among councils.

"One council would focus on this, another council would focus on that," he said. "The fees that are charged - I don't know where the hell they get that from at all, there's just no consistency.

"That, to me ... it's kind of weird."

Patrick Carroll, who is involved in forestry, said health and safety policy needed to be much more simple.

Huge safety policies made people complacent, he said and people would always accept a little bit of risk. "Having too much safety can actually have the opposite effect," he said.

Many spoke about a loss of common sense and personal responsibility and business owners felt they shouldered too much of the responsibility for safety.

But Mr Borrows said the idea that people were safer "back in the day" was not quite true.

"I think to some degree there's a bit of rosey-coloured spectacles looking back and they don't recognise that before we kept safety registers and before we had ACC we never even counted the accidents and no one every really took any notice of it," he said.

"But there is a real frustration with the way rules are enforced. Some of it is because none of these safe practices come without some cost and the fear of prosecution."

Mr Borrows said the fine for not wearing a cycle helmet on the road was far less that not wearing a helmet on quad bike on farm. "No one sees that as equitable and I think anyone in a business who's just trying to earn a living and employ people feels that they're up against it."