Origin of the concept of \"comprehensive management\" in the safety production policy

The \"Proposals for the 11th Five-Year Plan\" adopted at the Fifth Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee of the Party (held in Beijing from October 8 to 11, 2005) clearly called for adhering to safe development, and put forward the safety production policy of \"putting safety first, giving priority to prevention, and adopting comprehensive management.\" These days, the safety production policy is expressed in twelve characters, with “comprehensive management” added”

What was said upstairs is correct; it was mentioned in the 11th Five-Year Plan. Furthermore, Article 3 of the Shandong Province Work Safety Regulations stipulates that work safety management shall adhere to the principle of giving top priority to safety, focusing on prevention, and adopting comprehensive management approaches. This post was last edited by hw197358 on 2009-2-27 12:54.]

Source: Internet; Author: Wind over East Lake. I attended a safety training session this year, and the principle of \"safety first, prevention first, comprehensive management\" is already included in the training materials. But I think the term “comprehensive management” is inappropriate. As for the reason, simply put, it stems from the current safety management system. As the main enforcement agency for the Work Safety Law, the State Administration of Work Safety is responsible for comprehensive supervision over all industries. However, many industries have their own competent ministries, and these ministries are all part of the State Council (with their heads appointed by the Premier and **approved**), whereas the head of the Work Safety Administration only needs to be appointed by the Premier. Therefore, the Work Safety Administration has inherently an unequal status compared to ministries such as the Ministry of Construction, the Ministry of Railways, and the Ministry of Transport; they don’t even consider it necessary to pay you any attention, so how can you carry out \"comprehensive supervision\" over their respective industries? This is one of them. Secondly, safety assessment specialists and safety engineers registered with the General Administration of Work Safety do not hold much status in society or within their organizations. In fact, these safety assessment specialists fail to meet the qualification standards set by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, which results in the legitimacy and stability of the safety assessment examinations not being guaranteed. In other words, the certificates issued by the Work Safety Administration are not at all credible. This is the awkward situation that the State Administration of Work Safety faces in terms of its organizational structure. As mentioned above, the State Administration of Work Safety is the main enforcement agency for the Work Safety Law, and it should naturally also be the key entity responsible for implementing the work safety policies. Under such circumstances, with the Work Safety Administration even struggling to carry out \"comprehensive supervision,\" how can one expect it to take on the challenging task of \"comprehensive management\"?

LS is right. But it is precisely because comprehensive management isn’t truly implemented that it needs to be included in the policies – just as with the principle of putting safety first; how many companies can actually prioritize safety? The common reality in China is that those who shout about certain principles are often the ones who demand their implementation while failing to do so themselves!

Thank you all, I’ve learned a lot. During the internal audit of a project in Qinhuangdao last time, this issue was specifically mentioned. Since Qinhuangdao does not recognize comprehensive management, it requires that the term “comprehensive management” be completely removed from the report. This post was last edited by jayoshon on 2009-2-28 14:49]

Even in the general standards for safety standardization in hazardous chemical handling enterprises, which apply to the General Security Bureau as well, there is no mention of \"comprehensive management\"; it should therefore be removed