Seeing risk clearly: why reporting still falls short

Posted on June 16, 2026

The recent announcement of a public consultation on the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations has prompted plenty of discussion around thresholds, definitions and process. That is necessary.

But it risks missing a more fundamental point. The issue has never simply been how we report incidents. It is what that reporting is meant to achieve, and whether the system is actually delivering it.

The current review of RIDDOR marks the most significant look at reporting in more than a decade and goes to the heart of how risk is identified, understood and acted upon.

Why reporting matters

At its core, RIDDOR exists for one purpose. It provides the intelligence that allows patterns to be identified, action to be targeted and harm to be prevented. If that data is incomplete or inconsistent, the system fails at the first step.

That is a weakness in the evidence base we rely on. Many of the proposed changes are sensible.

Long-standing ambiguities are being addressed. The scope of reportable conditions is being reconsidered, particularly in relation to work related ill health. This reflects a wider shift away from focusing solely on acute injury and towards recognising how work contributes to harm over time.

There is also an effort to simplify the reporting process. That has value. Complexity discourages compliance, and poor usability contributes to both over and under reporting.

What sits behind the proposals

The more important question is what sits behind it. The direction of travel is clear. This is not simply about making reporting easier. It is about improving the quality of the data that underpins regulatory action. It is about ensuring that work related ill health, not just injury, is captured in a way that reflects modern working conditions.

If the scope of reporting expands, more organisations will find that incidents meet the threshold. If occupational disease is taken more seriously within RIDDOR, then the divide between “health” and “safety” becomes harder to justify. And if reporting improves, expectations will follow.

A short window to pay attention

RIDDOR is a means to an end; it allows risks to be seen, understood and addressed.

Poor reporting does the opposite. It creates blind spots which is where harm persists. They are where patterns are missed and where the lessons that should prevent future incidents are never learned.

So this review presents a clear choice. It can be treated as a technical exercise in refining process, or something more significant. An opportunity to realign how we understand and respond to risk.

We are now halfway through that consultation period (ends June 30th). Those responsible for managing risk would be well advised to pay attention and make their views known.