Removing risk removes judgement
Those in authority have tried to remove too much risk from people’s lives in the UK. Modern British society has become overly risk-averse, creating a safety culture where individuals are shielded from almost all potential harm. This erodes resilience and common sense because people become less able to assess and manage everyday risks on their own.
For example, playgrounds redesigned to eliminate every hazard may reduce children’s ability to learn physical and social risk-taking in safe ways. Many local councils have replaced climbing frames, swings, and roundabouts with ultra-safe, low-height equipment on rubberized surfaces. This removes the chance for children to learn physical risk-taking, coordination and confidence, replacing adventure with boredom.
The UK’s health and safety framework, while necessary in some areas, is sometimes overly restrictive or bureaucratic, with regulations that go beyond what is reasonable. This can lead to teachers, volunteers, or small organizations avoiding activities such as school trips, community fairs, or outdoor learning, because of paperwork and liability concerns. Some schools have cancelled field trips, sports days, or tree-climbing because of fears about liability if a pupil gets hurt.
Teachers often face heavy paperwork for even minor outings, discouraging enrichment activities. The result is that pupils lose opportunities to experience the world outside the classroom. Councils or organizers have sometimes banned stepladders for hanging decorations, required hard hats for village fêtes, or even cancelled pancake races for fear of insurance claims.
Some community events or school fundraisers have banned homemade cakes or jams due to hygiene or allergy concerns. This is disproportionate compared to the small actual risk involved. Volunteer sports coaches have reported being unable to run sessions without multiple safeguarding checks, risk assessments, and extensive forms. This kind of bureaucracy discourages volunteers, reducing children’s access to sport and community life.
Excessive efforts to eliminate risk can stifle entrepreneurship and innovation. Businesses may face heavy compliance costs or be discouraged from taking creative or experimental approaches due to fear of legal repercussions. This can lead to a risk-averse economy, where regulation outweighs reward.
When the state or institutions try to protect people from all risk, it reduces individuals’ sense of agency and responsibility for their own safety or wellbeing. And strict public health messaging or excessive regulation can infantilize adults rather than empowering them to make informed choices.
A culture that prizes total safety may lead to fear of strangers, over-supervised childhoods, and social isolation. It reduces spontaneity and adventure in everyday life.
In some areas, government attempts to ‘de-risk’ society by banning certain foods, activities or substances are paternalistic, reflecting a lack of trust in citizens’ ability to make decisions for themselves.
Everyday life is filled with warning labels on hot drinks, steps, or doors that most adults can navigate safely, and this constant messaging dulls people’s ability to assess risk meaningfully.
The point is that attempts to eliminate every conceivable risk can create sterile, overly managed environments, and discourage personal judgment or initiative. Most people aren’t rejecting sensible safety; they’re reacting against disproportionate caution where the risk is trivial compared to the loss of freedom, fun, or trust.
Madsen Pirie