H&S legislation criticised

The Government’s reform of health and safety legislation has been criticised by industry groups as a “disappointing backward step”

Despite Government claims that its reform will boost economic growth by lessening the cost and burden of compliance on low-risk businesses, industry groups have called the legislation “underwhelming” and said they lose sight of the true cost of harm.

“Cabinet has today agreed to a suite of system-wide changes, including sharpening the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, to cut through the unnecessary red tape holding these businesses back,” said Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden.

Cabinet has also agreed to:

• Reduce tick-box health and safety activities that do not protect workers from harm by sharpening the primary purpose of the Health and Safety at Work Act to focus on critical risk.
• Address over-compliance due to overlapping health and safety duties by clarifying the boundaries between the Act and regulatory systems that already manage the same risk.
• Cut compliance costs by reducing notification requirements to the regulator to only significant workplace events (deaths, serious injury, illness and incidents).
• Help end the proliferation of road cones by providing a hotline for the public to report overzealous road cone use, and for WorkSafe to confirm and provide guidance on instances of over-compliance.

Unambitious reforms

In response, Mike Cosman, Chair of the New Zealand Institute of Safety Management (NZISM), labelled the plans “underwhelming and unambitious”.

He added: “The Government has missed a golden opportunity to improve our poor health and safety performance.”

NZISM says that 50-70 people a year die in workplace accidents in New Zealand – double the rate of Australia and four times that of the UK, while a further 700 to 1,000 die from workplace diseases. Cosman added that the reforms would do little to make going to work safer.

“We want to see all workers come home to their families healthy and safe; we can’t see these reforms improving these dismal numbers.

“The reforms are focused instead on costs to businesses of prevention and not the much greater costs of harm. This seems to be looking through the wrong end of the telescope to us because the cost of our poor health and safety record is north of $4.9bn per year, to say nothing of the impact on workers and their families.”

In October 2024, a coalition including Business New Zealand, NZISM, the Health and Safety Association of New Zealand and the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions wrote a letter to Minister van Helden, outlining what they believed would be appropriate reforms, including improving and investing in WorkSafe, providing the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment with adequate resources to update regulations over a three-year period and leaving the Health and Safety At Work Act 2015 as is.

“Apart from some improvements to guidance development by WorkSafe, Minister van Velden has ignored advice from employers, workers and experts,” said Cosman.

WorkSafe consultation

When asked by Under Construction, WorkSafe confirmed it had been in active talks with the Government during this period of reform.

“WorkSafe provided input in its role as primary work health and safety regulator in the early stages of policy formation by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). MBIE is the policy agency for work health and safety, and holds responsibility for providing the Minister with policy advice and leading legislative change,” said a WorkSafe spokesperson.

“Many of the specifics are yet to be worked through, and we are looking forward to further announcements in the coming weeks and months.”

Focus on critical risk

In response, David Seymour, Acting Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety told Under Construction that focus is shifting towards critical risks in workplaces.

“During consultation, [Minister van Velden] travelled across the country to hear from workers, business-owners, and employers directly. She met and listened to the construction sector who raised the costs of health and safety compliance with her. Many spoke about the ‘tick-box’ exercises that don’t actually improve outcomes,” said Seymour. “For example, a construction company told the Minister that pre-qualifications in the construction industry take up a lot of time and resource but once the forms are filled in, they are largely forgotten and have little or no real impact on health and safety practice. This disproportionately affects small businesses with less capacity and resources to comply.

“Small businesses will still need to manage critical risks, including things such as electric shocks, working with dangerous tools and machinery, and materials like asbestos.”

ACOPs changing

In addition to the changes already outlined, Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) – the practical guidelines available to help people comply with health and safety duties – will also be tweaked to create “safe harbours of deemed compliance”.

“As part of my health and safety reform, I am making a change to the ACOP model to reassure people that if they comply with an ACOP, they have done enough to meet their health and safety duties,” said van Velden.

Further work will be carried out to identify small, low-risk businesses and detail the extent of their duties – which Cabinet will carry out by mid-2025.