M of H. This would seem to be about reducing inspections and realizing that regulation concerning a business employing thousands requires a more intensive policing regime than say a lone farmer.Ot that a mining enterprise poses more risk than that of market gardening. A large business would employ health and safety experts to reduce risk in the workplace and ensure regulations are complied with. I think you will agree that a one man business cannot often employ safety consultants, desirable though it may be and inspection should be where the risk is deemed the most high.
This would seem a rational deployment of resources in a finite world.
It is obvious that a one size fits all approach is a waste of valuable resources.An entire health and safety industry has come into being over the last quarter century and no sane person would expect to see any part of it rolled back. This is not the inspection regime I am talking about but the extension of business management to encompass risk reduction through the establishment of health and safety departments in order to ensure safety is not sacrificed for expediency, and that thorough risk assessment is carried out prior to any procedure.Previously to some extent this was done by instinct and experience. Today the procedure is both formalized and documented. This is not to establish a blame culture but an attempt to try recognise, codify, and reduce risk. Sadly sometimes the system shows flaws.