FFI: What's the story?

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has just completed its seventh run of invoices under the ‘Fees For Intervention’ (FFI) scheme. Continuing to divide industry, those it affects form three distinct camps: those who think it’s right that the ‘offender pays’; those - including the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP) - who believe self-funding could be compromising the nations’ impartial health and safety regulator; and everybody else. Despite the divisions, all three camps agree on one thing: they want a fair system. 

An age-old problem?

One of the latest areas of contention until very recently is the dated nature of the information that was being provided by the HSE in response to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. When the scheme first started, the information provided upon receipt of a formal FOI request included the most recent invoice run, aiding trend predictions. 

However, it seems that the sheer volume of FOI requests has now forced the regulator to publish a standardised table of information on its website as it was struggling to process requests at the demanded speed. At the tail end of November 2013, DWF made an invoice and associated data FOI request, and following an extension of the response period which was extended by a further three weeks, the most up-to-date information that could be provided dated back to July, which was already available on the HSE website. Since then, the HSE has worked hard to bring the information more up to date.

The perceived change in HSE’s approach from responding to FOI requests to the proactive publishing of data is clearly indicative of the level of interest that the controversial scheme continues to attract. 

Formal action

Understandably, there are many interested parties keen to understand how FFI is progressing and monitor developments over and above the general statistics freely available. In fact, DWF recently tried to establish key facts via another FOI request, looking at the number of interventions where invoices have been issued but no formal enforcement action was taken. 

The results were a little surprising. At the time DWF received a piecemeal response, since the introduction of FFI in October 2012, some 11,441 invoices had been issued under the scheme, yet formal enforcement notices were only issued on somewhere between 50-60 per cent of these. This supports a statement in the DWP’s triennial review that the scheme is having a negative impact on HSE’s reputation, damaging relationships and trust with UK businesses that many inspectors have worked hard to establish through proactive visits, engaging with key stakeholders and providing sound advice to businesses without the backdrop of any charging scheme.  

Planned or ‘just passing?’

Prior to FFI’s introduction, the HSE had raised concerns that the scheme could lead to its funding being squeezed, which in turn would mean its proactive inspection activities would suffer. However, a recent FOI requested suggests this is no longer a worry as only 1,327 of 11,441 invoices were ‘…as a result of a reactive inspection’ ie following a complaint or an incident being reported. This totals just 11.6 per cent.

Running totals

For businesses, the good news is that the average cost of each invoice does not appear to have risen too sharply. The HSE’s time allocation seems to be quite consistent, with the average invoice for the lifetime of the scheme (to the July 2013 figures) totalling £484. However, the number of invoices issued, and the number of companies to which they have been issued, has steadily increased with each invoice run. Almost 3,000 invoices were issued to 2,959 companies in the June/July 2013 period. 

Though the average invoice cost has not risen greatly, it is worth noting that in the latest period the number of invoices totalling more than £10,000 has increased, with eight recorded in the most recent batch. 

Independence vs income

To date, more than £5.5m has been netted from the 11,441 invoices issued and, as the scheme continues to build momentum, this number will continue to increase. 

If the recommendation from the DWP’s triennial review to ‘phase out’ the scheme is heeded, where will the Government look to recover the revenue deficit? As we wait to see whether the Government can afford to step away from FFI, industry will be looking for signs that it is responding to the issues of fairness that have been raised, and is taking steps to address them.