Bill Moved To Stop Companies Liquidating To Avoid Health And Safety Penalties
Luciana Berger, Labour MP for Liverpool Wavertree, made a superb speech in the House of Commons yesterday (8th February) when, under the 10 minute rule bill procedure, she moved her motion that a bill amending the Health & Safety At Work Act should be debated this session of Parliament.
Her amendment would allow the HSE to be able to freeze the assets of companies who under investigation for the death or injury of an employee(s), preventing them from going into insolvency, thereby avoiding paying any fines imposed as a result of being found guilty of breaking health and safety law.
In her speech, Luciana, a UCATT (Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians) member, gave examples of deaths caused by construction companies who used an existing legal loophole which allows companies under investigation by the HSE due to incident involving death or injury of employee, to liquidate the company. This then means that the courts can only impose a fraction of the total fine, before the liquidated company later reforms under a slightly different name.
Last year 50 people were killed as a result of workplace accidents.
Luciana Berger opened her movement of her Bill by reminding the MPs that:
“Many in the House take our safety at work for granted. We are lucky enough to be in an environment where the risks that we are exposed to are limited, but thousands of people in our country are not so lucky.”
She added:
“ When we think of danger, our armed forces often spring to mind, but in a whole range of industries, such as construction, workers are placed in harm’s way—those who work with heavy machinery, large vehicles or electrics, for example.
In these environments, there can be serious consequences if accidents happen. It is vital, then, that we have laws in place to ensure that every precaution is taken to keep people safe at work, and that employers who ignore their legal responsibilities are properly deterred and punished when they do wrong.”
Luciana then explained her reasons fro brining forward the motion for her Bill to be heard within the current timetable of Parliamentary business:
"My reason for bringing this motion before the House today is simple: a worrying number of companies are not only ignoring the laws designed to protect their employers but exploiting legal loopholes to avoid proper punishment following a death at work resulting from their malpractice. In the brief time I have today, I want to mention two companies abusing these loopholes.”
She then gave examples of two incidents which resulted in the deaths of workers:
Mark Thornton aged 46, working on a building site, was killed when a 6 tonne steel column struck him on the head and shoulders after the crane carrying it buckled and toppled over. Mark worked for Bryn Thomas Crane Hire.
She said:
“When the Health and Safety Executive investigated, following Mark’s death, it concluded that a
“series of health and safety warnings and procedures were ignored. The crane was simply not capable of lifting the steel column, when it was nearly 18 metres away, without it being overloaded. If the work had been properly planned, and the crane had been properly maintained, then Mr Thornton would still be alive today.”
Luciana then told the silent and still MPs in the chamber:
“In December 2010, shortly before the case came to trial, the company that Mark worked for went into administration, despite its paying out dividends of over £200,000 in each of the three financial years following Mark’s death. During the trial, the judge stated that he was unable to impose the appropriate fine of £300,000 for flouting health and safety legislation because the company was in administration. Instead, he was able only to issue a fine of just £4,500.”
She added:
“While in administration, the company was bought out by two of its directors, and is now operating under an almost identical name. It is still run by the same people, and still using the same equipment. It is, to all intents and purposes, the same company. To date, inquires made by UCATT to the administrators about the moneys owed by Bryn Thomas and the huge dividends paid to the directors have not been adequately answered.”
Luciana then went on to her second example:
“In February 2008, Noel Corbin was just 29 when he suffered fatal head injuries after falling from a roof in the course of installing a satellite dish for his employer, Foxtel Ltd. The ladder that he was provided with was too short and he had not received adequate training for the task that he had been asked to do.
In fact, the property that he was working on had previously been visited by other installers and the job designated as impossible without a specialist team. His employer knew that, yet sent him to do the job alone anyway.
Again, an HSE investigation took place and, just like Bryn Thomas, Foxtel entered administration shortly before the trial. Foxtel was found guilty of breaching health and safety laws, but because it was in administration, the court was able only to impose a fine of just £1. Just like in the case of Mark Thornton, Foxtel has since been resurrected, and continues to trade under virtually the same name.”
To a totally silent House of Commons, she remarked upon the family concerned:
“Noel’s family were kind enough to join me in Parliament on Monday to launch this Bill. They bravely shared their tragic story and their sense of deep injustice. I can only begin to imagine how they must feel.”
She then explained how her Bill, if carried into statute would affect the outcome of HSE investigations into injury and death at work:
“Mark and Noel are just two examples of people who should be alive today but are not, and I could have named more. The HSE has numerous powers to carry out investigations and inquiries where it considers that there may have been a breach of health and safety regulations.
However, those cases clearly demonstrate that its powers are limited where a company under investigation for a serious breach of health and safety law goes into liquidation. The loopholes that that has created are wrong. They are exploited by negligent employers unwilling to take responsibility for the tragedies that they have caused, and they deny the victims’ families and friends the justice that they deserve.”
She concluded by saying:
“We have a responsibility, to the families and friends who have lost loved ones, to close those loopholes.”
Turning to the issue of the government’s Red Tape Challenge and Health and Safety legislation, Luciana said:
“I urge Ministers not to remove regulations that protect our workers. In the construction industry, strong health and safety laws save lives. If our laws were stronger, more lives might be saved. Last year, 50 people died on construction sites—that is 50 people too many.
Employers who wilfully avoid protecting the lives of the people who work for them must never be able to walk away without punishment or to continue trading and endangering others. That is why I have brought this Bill forward.
In doing so, I hope that the Government will look at the issue and be persuaded that the time has come to put this modest but vital measure into law.”
The MP has support from Labour colleagues for her Health and Safety (Amendment) proposal, which received an unopposed second reading. But it may be unlikely to proceed much further due to a lack of parliamentary time.
You can watch Luciana Berger give her speech in Parliament here
Source: Hansard / Parliament UK website / Luciana Berger website
