Is this the end of the 'Elf as we know it?

David Cameron has today announced a review of the myriad health and safety laws, which currently add unbelievable amounts of red tape to even the most simplest of tasks.  Could this move (which could well be one of the fledgling Coalition's most popular announcements) mark the start of a new era of common sense politics?

Those of you who have ever had a passing acquaintance with the Daily Mail will be well versed on the ever-increasing number of ludicrous decrees passed by the Health and Safety executive in recent years.  Its pages carry reports ranging from the banning of the traditional game of conkers from school playgrounds (unless the children wear safety goggles, of course), to the frankly scandalous case of two PCSOs who stood by and watched a ten-year-old boy drown in a lake because "they had not been trained to go into water".

Safety goggles: the new 'must-have' playground accessory

Of course, it would be incorrect in the extreme to believe that Mr. Cameron is advocating a complete removal of the much-criticised body; despite the criticism against it, it still plays a vital role in ensuring the safety of employees in the workplace.  Even I, one of the HSE's strongest critics, could never advocate a removal of the safety net which can often mean the difference between life and death for many people.

I remember sitting in on this court case a few years ago in which a food-processing company was fined heavily for failing to ensure that its workforce was able to work in a safe environment.  The person concerned may never get his fingers back, but at the very least the ruling that his employer was responsible will ensure that he is able to hold them to account.

Instead, Mr. Cameron has made the reasons for his review extremely clear: he wants to strike a blow against the compensation culture that is prevailing in the United Kingdom and take a significant step back from the Nanny State which the Labour government created over the last thirteen years.

You only have to watch fifteen minutes of daytime TV these days to be bombarded by adverts imploring you to "claim the money that is rightfully yours" if you have ever slipped on a slightly damp floor, or tripped over a paving-stone that is just a few millimeters higher than its neighbours.

However, the blame cannot be laid at the door of these unscrupulous firms, for they are merely acting upon laws that make people responsible for this kind of thing.  If the laws were not there in the first place, and if common sense had prevailed in the first place, then these firms would have no raison d'etre and we would never have become the litigation state which we are today.

Such a change in the attitude of society has had a knock-on effect in other areas too.  The education of our children is suffocating in a sea of red tape, with headteachers reluctant to authorise any form of non-classroom activity for fear that a child may be injured and the school bankrupted by the litigation which would inevitably follow.

I remember fondly going on week-long holidays with my primary school, with trips to the beaches at Scarborough and Weymouth and even being allowed free time (at the age of ten, no less) to explore York city centre with my friends without teacher supervision.  These days, someone would have lost their job for that decision.

During his General Election campaign, David Cameron promised to give people more control over their day-to-day lives as part of his Big Society idea, and this is truly a step in the right direction.

Naturally, the Unions are not pleased with the announcement; but if a few strikes are the price we have to pay in order to regain our freedom and, more importantly, the implied trust of the state then I'm all for it.