|
 |
 HSE JobPages - News
|
| |
The CIEH to deliver food safety programmes in China
2007-01-13 08:08:22
The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) has forged partnerships with China Chain Store and Franchise Association and the China Hotel Association to provide its food safety training and certification programmes in China.
The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) has forged partnerships with China Chain Store and Franchise Association and the China Hotel Association to provide its food safety training and certification programmes in China.
The CIEH is the UK’s market leader for accredited food safety and health and safety qualifications with a significant presence in the United States, where it has become the second largest food safety testing body.
In China, the CIEH has developed a comprehensive programme of food safety training for Tesco, which is opening a network of outlets across the country.
Commenting, Graham Jukes, CIEH Chief Executive, said:
“This is a major achievement for the CIEH and reinforces our position as a leading provider of quality food safety training programmes in the UK and overseas. The CIEH’s high standards and reputation for excellent service have become the industry benchmark.
“Training and education is an essential ingredient for any food business in producing food that is safe to eat – and is good for business. CIEH training will help China to achieve internationally recognised standards for safety in food premises.
“The Chinese Government has expressed a desire to have top quality food safety in its establishments in readiness for the Olympics in 2008 and we are pleased to be able to assist the Government in fulfilling this objective.”
original source: http://www.cieh.org/news_and_media
|
| |
Regulation of personal injury claims on the horizon
2007-01-13 08:07:53
The personal injury claims sector could soon come in for some much-needed regulation ...
The personal injury claims sector could soon come in for some much-needed regulation, according to Richard Langton, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL).
Speaking at a conference held by the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL), Langton said that strict regulation was needed to protect claimants from third-party insurers’ lawyers who cold call them, offering them cash upfront in an attempt to “capture” claims.
Langton said eighteen months of discussions between the Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) and stakeholders, including the Civil Justice Council; claimant and defendant lawyers; and consumer groups, would lead to a streamlining of the compensation process, with: “quick notification, quick admission, quick rehabilitation and quick settlement.”
APIL research shows that in 63 per cent of cases, insurers do not comply with the existing three-month timetable under the civil procedure rules.
Langton said the DCA’s imminent consultation paper to review the whole claims process, will produce a “brave new world of the ‘super’ protocol.”
http://www.shponline.co.uk
|
| |
July date predicted for corporate manslaughter Act
2007-01-13 08:07:27
After passing through the Commons Committee stage, the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide Bill ...
After passing through the Commons Committee stage, the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide Bill had its first and second readings in the House of Lords in December. The Bill is set to go before a Grand Committee in late January/early February and could be enacted in the summer.
Corporate manslaughter expert barrister Gerard Forlin told SHP: “Although it’s not over until the fat lady sings – and issues remain about extensions to individuals – many feel that the Bill will be enacted on, or before, 21 July 2007.”
In the revised draft, Forlin found “the most interesting and dangerous parts for organisations” in clause 8, which state that juries should consider whether a corporate culture existed in the organisation that encouraged, tolerated or led to a management failure. As Forlin points out, this is the first time this consideration has been “enshrined in the UK statute”. Whether it means that health and safety convictions – pre-dating the Act – would also be considered, is not clear.
Amendments in the wording of the controversial senior management test have also been made to ensure that organisations are not prosecuted on the basis of isolated, low-level management failings. It will no longer be necessary to prosecute a director or senior manager in order to prosecute a company.
Maggie Robbins from the Centre for Corporate Accountability (CCA) welcomes the change, but is concerned that the wording is still not clear enough. For example, if there is evidence of serious management failures, which are not at senior level, an organisation would not be in breach of the law. Also, if an organisation admits grossly negligent failures at junior/middle management level, but failures at senior management level are serious, but not grossly negligent – the organisation could again avoid prosecution.
The difficulty in prosecuting complex management structures for systemic failures, and the problem of delegation making companies ‘manslaughter proof’, are some of the key things that the Bill was intended to overcome. As Robbins, points out, there is no way of knowing whether the wording of this section is clear enough until the first case goes to court.
Since its first draft, the Bill has been criticised for: the exemption it offers unincorporated and public bodies; the need for Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) consent for private prosecutions; the omission of ‘aiding and abetting’ as an offence; and, the lack of penalties available, with fines and remedial orders – as for health and safety offences – being all that courts can impose. Robbins feels that other penalties could be more effective in changing corporate culture and behaviour.
http://www.shponline.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
CONTACT US 
