The problem in assessing CDM’s effectiveness as A Beal suggests (Letters, 2 July, page 32) is that the industry has very rarely implemented the regulations as intended.

CDM makes straightforward requirements of the duty holders: designers are simply required to integrate consideration of health and safety into their other considerations of buildability and maintainability. It’s that simple.

In return, CDM offers the opportunity to advise clients on the need for, and benefits of, proper planning, management and scheduling. This provision within CDM appears to be seldom used and yet is advice clients would appreciate.

When CDM is being implemented fully then effectiveness can be investigated. In the meantime, would designers not do better to take advantage of the legislation to combat many of the problems they face, and in so doing give themselves the opportunity to command reasonable fees?