Private Business. - Dangerous Substances Bill, 1970: Second Stage. – Dáil Éireann (19th Dáil) – Wednesday, 9 Feb 1972

Private Business. - Dangerous Substances Bill, 1970: Second Stage.

Minister for Labour (Mr. J. Brennan)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

As Deputies will have gathered from the Explanatory Memorandum which I have circulated, the object of the Dangerous Substances Bill is, briefly, to bring up to date existing law protecting the general public against the dangers inherent in the use of explosives and petroleum, and to enable the Minister for Labour, by means of statutory instruments, to prescribe any necessary measures required to protect the public against other dangerous substances. Many of those things are not subject to any statutory control at present.

At present safety law on explosives and petroleum is contained in the Explosives Act, 1875, the Petroleum Acts 1871, 1879 and 1881, and various regulations and orders made under those Acts. These subsidiary instruments were made mostly around the turn of the century. The first thing to be said about that body of legislation is that it belongs to another and a simpler age.

Although the Explosives Act, 1875 deals with other explosives besides gunpowder, these appear to have been brought in almost as an afterthought and the Act is primarily concerned with gunpowder. It controls in considerable detail the activities of gunpowder factories and the storage of gunpowder in magazines, but most of its provisions are anachronisms today. The very use of the term "gunpowder" dates the legislation.

I could not say offhand whether the Petroleum Acts pre-date the invention of the internal combustion engine, but it is clear that the framers of those laws did not foresee the extent to which our whole civilisation would become so dependent on the products of the petroleum industry. The very definition of the word "petroleum" has a touch of the alchemist about it. The 1871 Act applies to "petroleum, including any rock oil, Rangoon oil, Burmah oil, oil made from petroleum, coal, schist, shale, peat or other bituminous substance, and any products of petroleum, or any of the above-mentioned oils, which gives off an inflammable vapour at less than 100 degrees Fahrenheit".

The Act envisages the transport of petroleum in what it calls "vessels", which I take to be some kind of fairly small containers, and speaks of ships "landing" their cargoes of petroleum. The 1879 Act, by reducing the flash-point of petroleum from 100 degrees to 73 degrees Fahrenheit, restricted statutory control to the lighter and more volatile petroleum-spirit, although the heavier petroleum oils in their own way can be every bit as great a fire hazard as the lighter ones. The 1881 Act regulates the hawking of petroleum-spirit from what it calls, "carriages". The amount which could be carried in any one "carriage" is limited to 20 gallons, and again, it is envisaged that the petroleum will be in "vessels". Modern methods of transporting petroleum both by sea and by land just do not fit into this legal framework.

In addition to the deficiencies of existing law which I have already indicated, there are other hazards which technological development has thrust upon us and which are not subject to statutory control at present. Among these are the transport and storage of industrial acids and chemicals, the use of the slurry-truck explosives process in mining and quarrying, and the use of compressed gas cylinders and aerosols. With the continuous acceleration of technology it is only to be expected that further hazards will arise; some of these may take forms which we, like our predecessors, cannot foresee at present. This Bill would enable the responsible Minister to prescribe any measures that may be found necessary to protect the community against such hazards.

Part I of the Bill makes the usual preliminary and general provision for interpretation, presentation of orders and regulations, expenses, repeals, et cetera. One point to which I would like to draw attention is that the definition in section 1 (2) of “proper local or harbour authority” for the purposes of the Bill will end the anomalous situation in existing law where owners of private harbours can, as harbour authorities, grant petrol storage licences to themselves.

The Defence Forces and Civil Defence are exempted from the scope of the Bill.

Part II deals with explosives. It controls, by means of a licensing system, the importation, possession, sale and purchase of explosives. These restrictions will not apply, however, to firearms ammunition which will continue to be dealt with under the Fire Arms Act, 1925. Explosives may be manufactured only in a licensed factory. There are provisions regarding the marking and packing of explosives for conveyance. The foregoing requirements may be modified, by regulations, for fireworks, safety, signalling and rescue devices and similar articles.

Part III deals with petroleum. It provides that petroleum-spirit in other than small quantities may be kept only in a store licensed by the appropriate local authority or harbour authority. Containers of petroleum-spirit must be marked "petroleum-spirit" and "highly inflammable". There is provision for the making of regulations for the protection of persons against risk of injury caused by petroleum. The term "petroleum" includes petroleum-spirit but also covers other less volatile and inflammable petroleum such as fuel oil and heating oil.

Part IV deals with other dangerous substances. It empowers the Ministers to declare by order a particular substance to be a dangerous substance and to make regulations to protect persons against risk of injury from such a substance. Before making such an order or such regulations, the Minister must give public notice of his intention, and afford interested parties an opportunity to make representations to him. In common with all other statutory instruments made under the Act, such orders and regulations must be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Part V is concerned with the notification and investigation of accidents arising out of the keeping of dangerous substances under licence. The procedures for holding inquests and formal investigations are similar to corresponding provisions in the Factories Act, 1955 and the Mines and Quarries Act, 1965.

Part VI deals with administration —licensing, regulations, exemptions, fees, and powers of inspectors. Licences for explosives factories and magazines will be issued by the Minister. Local authorities and harbour authorities will issue licences for explosives stores and petroleum-spirit stores.

Appeals against refusals by local or harbour authorities to grant licences, or against conditions imposed by such authorities in licences granted, will lie to the Minister. There is a general power to make regulations for the purposes of the Act and also a power to provide for exemptions by regulations. The powers of inspectors are similar to their powers under existing safety legislation.

Part VII makes the usual kind of provision for offences, penalties and legal proceedings on behalf of the Minister or licensing authorities as appropriate.

Finally, Part VIII deals with a number of miscellaneous matters. Setting-off fireworks in public places will continue to be an offence which can be prosecuted by the Garda. Suitable precautions must be taken in the conveyance, loading and unloading of dangerous substances and every ship carrying such substances must notify the harbour master on entering harbour. Trespass upon premises licensed under the Act will be an offence. Employees in such premises must use any safety appliances provided, and must not endanger themselves or others. Regulations may require the posting of abstracts of the Act, copies of regulations, or other prescribed notices.

Essentially what I am proposing in this Bill is an up-dating and extension of safety precautions in the use of explosives and petroleum in industry and trade. Both the workers immediately involved and the general public need the support of these safety measures in their every-day lives

Deputies will have noted that the Bill does not concern itself in any way with the criminal use of explosives which is dealt with in a different code of legislation

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. P. Belton

We in Fine Gael accept the Minister's recommendations in this Bill. However, I feel that this Bill might not have been introduced at all if it were not for the trouble in the North and the need to control explosives or petrol because they might be used as raw material for petrol bombs. When the Minister for Justice introduced the Firearms Bill he could have included three-quarters of this Bill in it. The section of this Bill which requires safety first measures, which are not spelled out in this Bill but promised in the future, should form another Bill to be brought in by the Minister for Labour. I cannot understand why the Minister for Labour is bringing in this Bill at all. It is a Bill for the Minister for Justice and Department of Justice. It is a Bill which controls explosives, petroleum products and I presume dangerous substances mean something that could be used in the making of a bomb. In each section of the Bill there is a reference to safety which is not spelled out. This safety measure, in my opinion, has just been put in so as to have it brought in by the Department of Labour. There is the provision regarding the notification of accidents and the investigation of same and permission for an inspector to enter premises. This again shows that it should be a matter for the Department of Justice. Section 13 reads:

An officer of the Garda Síochána (including an inspector acting as superintendent) may issue to any person a certificate authorising the purchase of explosives subject to and in accordance with regulations.

The Minister for Labour, not the Minister for Justice, can revoke licences. In other words, the gardaí now have two Ministers running them.

Section 35 reads:

(1) The Minister may make regulations for the purposes of this Act.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, regulations may provide for—

(a) the expiry and revocation of licences, or any class of licence, continued in force under section 8;

If this practice were to be continued to its logical conclusion the Garda could have six or seven Ministers as bosses.

The safety first measures in this Bill should have been brought in under the Factories Act and could have been given to the safety first officers, of which there are very few to enforce. In spite of the Minister's promises very few have been recruited in the last few years. Where there are safety first regulations I do not think they are checked or people made to comply with them. This is something that could have been taken in hand and it could have been in a separate Bill.

I do not see why this Bill should be handled by the Department of Labour particularly when the Minister only said what precautions would be taken in the future. Section 17 reads:

(1) A person packing explosives for conveyance shall take all practical steps to prevent risk of injury to person or property.

(2) The Minister may, by regulations, provide for the packing of explosives for conveyance.

(3) A person who consigns or conveys any explosive packet otherwise than in conformity with this section or such regulations shall be guilty of an offence.

What regulations? Let us see what regulations there are to be. We want to know what they are. Section 23 reads:

(1) The Minister may, by regulations, provide for the protection of persons against risk of injury caused by petroleum.

(2) Regulations may impose duties upon employers, employed persons, occupiers of premises and other persons.

(3) Before making any regulations the Minister shall publish in such manner as he thinks fit notice of his intention to do so and give persons desiring to make representations in relation to the proposed regulations an opportunity to do so.

There are provisions in every section to make this Bill qualify for handling by the Department of Justice. I cannot understand why it is not a matter for the Department of Justice. We want the details of the safety precautions, the clothing that must be worn, the type of vessel which is to be used to deliver the stuff. We remember what happened in Sherriff Street when dynamite was missing.

I object to this Bill being introduced by the Department of Labour but I agree with the controls provided for. We accept this Bill in principle though there are amendments to it that we want to see accepted. Before we agree to this Bill we want to see the various safety first measures spelled out. We do not want to see this Bill passed without knowing what the safety regulations are. We want to see if they are sufficient. In particular, members who are officials of trade unions and who are involved in this can get details from the workers of what is required. It should not be left to the Minister and the civil servants. I am not saying they would not make a good job of it, but I think the proper information will be obtained only from those who handle these things, the owners and the carriers. I agree that places must be licensed and that the licence must be issued by the gardaí.

I notice the carrier is exempted. I should like to see the regulations spelled out where the carrier is concerned because he should not carry these things unless they are clearly marked and all the regulations are complied with. If the regulations are not complied with he should be liable to prosecution, but not to the same extent, of course, as the consignee.

It is only right and proper that any person who refuses to give information to the gardaí should be guilty of an offence.

In section 24 it is provided that the Minister shall publish in such manner as he thinks fit notice of his intention to declare a substance to constitute a potential danger to person or property. I approve of this and I approve of the opportunity being given to those affected by the notice to make representations to the Minister.

Section 12 provides that no person shall sell or purchase any explosive unless he is the holder of an import licence under section 10 or the licensee of a factory, a magazine or a store. There are, of course, other controls too.

There are quite a few firms which use explosives on a small scale. I am thinking now of firms which supply the power gun and nails or rawl plugs in the construction industry. These speed up the work of construction considerably. They are invaluable in reconstruction work. The power gun is used to drive the nails or the rawl plugs into concrete walls or through iron girders. They are a time-saving device. I am worried as to what the effect of this legislation may be in this particular connection. These power guns are used by TV erectors, caravan assemblers and certain types of builders. A company based in Dublin may have 1,500 customers and of that 1,500 customers 200 may buy no more than £20 worth of cartridges per annum. Taking the powder out of these cartridges would be a lengthy and tedious operation and, because of that, I think that there should be an exception in this particular case.

These companies could not maintain branches throughout the country because there would not be enough business to justify the maintenance of branches. The bigger customers might order anything up to 20,000 cartridges. Controlling the amount purchased would be very awkward. Incidentally, these firms do not sell unless a traveller calls on the purchaser or the purchaser is well known to the firms. The firms, of course, have records of all the cartridges sold. The gun itself is quite safe because it has to have pressure against it to be effective; it must be reflexed from a hard surface. These cartridges would not fit any other type of gun. The amount of powder used is negligible. If every individual using these had to get a licence a good deal of time might be wasted. There is no reason why the firms should not be licensed. I should like the Minister to look into this aspect and find out if similar machines are used in other types of business. because if this Bill comes in it will harm industry and put many people out of employment.

The Minister suggests petroleum and petroleum products. I do not understand the technical position but at present we are allowed to store 60 gallons of petrol without a licence. Does ordinary paraffin or TVO come under this control? In any reasonably-sized business house you would have a tank for 600 gallons of whatever fuel is used for heating. In some cases the tank would be much bigger. In the case of farmers using TVO they could have up to 500 gallons, depending on the number of tractors they use. I am asking do these come under control?

In his opening statement the Minister mentioned that gas cylinders and aerosols would come under control. I do not know very much about the subject but aerosols are in common use and I do not know what is the extent of the control. The Minister said:

Among these are the transport and storage of industrial acids and chemicals, the use of the slurry-truck explosives process in mining and quarrying, and the use of compressed gas cylinders and aerosols.

I do not know how this will be controlled because very often gas cylinders are used by sub-contractors in various places of work; they could be moved from place to place. I am not very well up on gas cylinders but I understand there are several ways of producing pressure sometimes by compressed air and sometimes by actual gas pressure. I do not know to what extent aerosols are controlled.

The Minister also said:

Before making such an order or such regulations, the Minister must give public notice of his intention, and afford interested parties an opportunity to make representations to him.

I believe that to cover section 12 and give the Minister a fair chance of finding out what exists—I know it is very difficult to find out by writing to people—he should put an advertisement in the newspapers to find out what other things like Hilti nails or power-driven nails are in use. There could be other instruments, of which I am not aware, which are used in the construction industry. Probably big building contractors might use these things and I think we should make sure of this. I know the Minister can amend the Bill afterwards but it is far better to have the provision in the Bill at the beginning rather than amend afterwards.

I agree with the Minister in all his other regulations. The marking of containers, and if it is possible making them in different colours, is to be commended if it is not impracticable. It may not be fair to ask people to do this.

It is stated in Part V:

(1) Where any explosion or fire, or any accident involving a substance kept under licence, occurs in or about or in connection with licensed premises and occasions loss of life or injury to person or property, the licensee shall forthwith send to the Minister written notice of the accident and of the loss of life or injury.

(2) (a) No person shall, except with the consent of an inspector, disturb the place where any such accident occurred or tamper with anything thereat before—

(i) the expiration of three clear days after notification of the accident in accordance with subsection (1), or

(ii) that place has been visited by an inspector, whichever first occurs.

(b) In any proceedings taken in respect of a contravention of this subsection consisting of the doing of any act, it shall be a defence to prove that the doing of that act was necessary for securing the safety of the place or persons thereat.

The Minister is asking for three days. Who is this to suit? The inspector? Suppose it happens at a petrol station or at the Esso place. A key must be put in the gate and it must be closed for three days until an inspector strolls along to see it. The onus should be on the inspector to be there, if the company telephones, within three hours. A firm such as Texaco or Esso could afford to close and pay their staff for three days because they have the resources to do so but a small business cannot do this. Yet the owner must close his business for three days unless that inspector comes. We most certainly object to that. I agree, and I do not want to be taken otherwise, that there should be a proper investigation, but to close for three days could break a small firm that is living from day to day. If inspectors are to be appointed they should be on the job within three, four or five hours after being telephoned and the job should be done in a day.

In Part V, section 27, subsection (4) states:

If the Minister considers that it is expedient that notice should be given under this section in case of an occurrence of any special class in or about or in connection with licensed premises, he may by regulations extend the provisions of this section to every occurrence of that class, whether loss of life or injury to person or property is caused or not.

I agree with that. I agree that the Minister should get notice of an inquest and that no person having any personal interest, be he an owner or a worker, should be on the jury. I agree also that invitations to give evidence should be subject to the discretion of the coroner.

Section 29 gives to the Minister the power to direct a formal investigation of accidents. In the case of the Minister having received information from an inspector or a garda, it would be only right that he would be in the position to direct a formal investigation, but otherwise this could be it dangerous, because of pressure, be it business, political or anything else, to let him have a such power.

Section 37 reads that:

The Minister may, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, prescribe the fee to be paid for licences generally or for any particular kind of licence.

Surely at this stage we should know what are the fees. If licences are to be required for the purchase of nails, we should know how much these licences will cost. This provision might mean that a person who buys £12 worth of nails each year might suddenly find that he is required to pay £5 or £6 for a licence. We must know, too, what the safety regulations are to be. We have been told nothing about these matters.

Subsection (1) (a) of section 39 gives to inspectors the power to: enter, inspect and examine at all times, by day and night, any premises which he has reasonable cause to believe to be used for the manufacture, storage, packing or sale of any substance...

It would seem that the law is being broken by the Department of Justice. If an inspector is of the opinion that a search of a premises is warranted, he should have a search warrant before entering that premises in the same way as he would have a search warrant to enter one's home. There is something to be said for safety-first regulations and the Minister may be right in this. However, it is my opinion that a search warrant is required for this operation.

Subsection (1) (f) of section 39 deals with the powers of inspectors in respect of any persons found on any such premises and with the questioning of such persons. I wonder whether the two-month period is sufficiently long. A person might have left the employment of a factory manufacturing explosives and after two months, or even six months, he could organise a raid on that premises and take goods away. I do not see any reason why the period stipulated should not be 12 months.

Section 40 deals with the power of an inspector to require a remedy for immediate or apprehended danger. It is concerned with the taking away from premises of whatever an inspector wishes to take away. In such circumstances should not a receipt for the goods involved be given to the owner? This matter, while not covered in this section, is covered later to some extent; but what can happen in practice is that an inspector can go before a peace commissioner and say that he had to destroy so much material. Perhaps his doing so is a kind of receipt, but I would favour giving a receipt at the time of taking goods away.

Subsection (2) of section 45 points out that sections 115 and 116 of the Factories Act, 1955, shall apply in relation to any structural or other alterations in any premises to which this Act applies. Surely this point could be covered in most cases by agreement at the time of letting of a premises. If the loopholes are to be eliminated, the sender should have proper rules and controls as to the method by which goods are packed and marked and as to how they are to be delivered. There should also be explicit directions in relation to how goods are to be carried. In the case of a lorry, should that lorry have creels; must there be a lock on the creels or must a person remain with the goods for the duration of their transportation? All these questions should be answered explicitly so that we might know whether there is proper control. There is no point in the Minister making the odd amendment later. I agree that a ship coming into harbour should give notice of carrying explosives. We have been very lax in this respect up to now.

Basically, this is a Bill for the Department of Justice. The only respect in which it can be considered a Bill for the Department of Labour is in so far as it proposes safety regulations and precautions against injury or death on the part of those handling these substances. However, nothing has been explained in the Bill and we are told merely that the Minister has good intentions. In order to be accepted, the Bill should contain all details of the safety-first measures that are taken.

Finally, I would ask the Minister whether it is not possible to get in touch with the various construction and reconstruction industries in the country for the purpose of ascertaining what tools or instruments they use that need power charging. This is very important and it could save a lot of time to the many people involved in construction. As I pointed out earlier, there is practically no chance of these power charges being used in any way to make a bomb or bullets. I should like the Minister to check this matter thoroughly.

Mr. Desmond

We in the Labour Party wish to give a general welcome to this essential piece of legislation. It is our opinion that it fulfils a longstanding need. We understand that the Bill has been with the parliamentary draftsman for some considerable time. In updating and in codifying the current legislation and in extending it, as this Bill rightly does, we find it brings our statutory regulations in line with the best of international practice.

With the major technological developments today, with mining development, with the extensive use of pressed gas in industry, with the ever-growing use of acids and other chemicals in new industries, and even with the development of off-shore oil exploration, this legislation is necessary and will be very valuable in the decades ahead. Many Irish people in industry, both employers and workers, are far too casual in their handling and use of explosives, acids, petroleum and oil products. Many of the accidents which occur in industry in the use of these substances could be avoided. As a union official and as a member of the National Industrial Safety Organisation I have had to read of instances where workers have, on some occasions through their own fault, suffered severe accidents, been blown to pieces or sustained severe burns in, say, storage tanks or been overcome by fumes from industrial acids or other chemicals. Anyone on the trade union side who has ever had to meet the relatives and friends of such workers will strongly support this kind of legislation.

I often have occasion, as I am sure do other Members of the House, to be apprehensive of the kind of catastrophe that could occur with very heavily laden articulated trucks carrying petroleum and oil products and so on, very often at quite a high speed, along our arterial roads. The danger is extreme and it is necessary, therefore, that the law should be rigidly enforced, that the Department should have the necessary number of inspectors and that the police authorities be given assistance to ensure that these regulations and orders are fully enforced under the proposed Act.

We in the Labour Party are also concerned to ensure that there will be a further tightening up in order to avoid theft of industrial explosives from stores within the Republic. There are criminal elements and extreme political elements in society who would readily avail of such explosives if they could get their hands on them. It is to be hoped that this legislation will ensure that explosives, in particular, are effectively controlled and stored and that any abuse will be prevented in the national interest. While I am aware that such prevention is normally the function of the Minister for Justice, the legislation brought in here by the Minister for Labour and Social Welfare will also help in this direction.

It is the intention of the Labour Party to consider the Bill with a view to putting down any necessary amendments on Committee Stage. At the moment we do not have any amendments in mind but, as a result of the Minister's statement here today on Second Stage, we shall consult with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and with any of the employer organisations who might be interested to see if they wish to put in any amendments. The Minister would expedite this legislation by indicating to what extent such consultations have already taken place. I gather they have been quite extensive over a long period in the preparation of the Bill, and I wonder if any major aspects are still outstanding.

Again, I welcome the Bill. This codification of existing legislation is long overdue.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Like Deputy Belton, I welcome this Bill. It is necessary that explosives and other substances capable of injuring people or damaging property should be under control and that they should not fall into the hands of people who are likely to make improper or illegal use of them. This Bill is particularly opportune at this time. The Minister referred to the legislation of 1875, 1871, 1879 and 1881 and said that that body of legislation belongs to another and a simpler age. I think it belongs to what might be described as a less explosive age.

The one thing that struck me about the Minister's approach to this Bill and the problem with which it proposes to deal is that he did not tell us in his speech or in his explanatory memorandum what the objects of the Bill are. It is usual to start off, either in the Minister's speech or in his explanatory memorandum, by saying that the objects of this Bill are A, B and C. The Minister has not told us that. I have been reading the Bill and the explanatory memorandum and I think I could summarise the objects of the Bill by saying that the first object seems to be to control securely dangerous substances and explosives and petroleum, and to ensure that these substances will be so secured that they cannot be stolen by people with evil intent and that they will not be readily available for purchase by people who want them for illegal purposes.

Mr. J. Brennan

That is not the purpose of the Bill at all.

Mr. P. Belton

Of course it is.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Minister does not seem to agree with that.

Mr. P. Belton

He is right in doing it.

Mr. J. Brennan

That has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The second object of the Bill, I would think, is to secure the safety of persons engaged in work involving the use or handling of dangerous substances or explosives.

Mr. J. Brennan

That is its entire purpose.

Mr. P. Belton

Why did the Minister not spell it out then?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am not making any great issue out of this. I think Deputy Belton is quite correct when he says this. The Minister says the entire object of the Bill is to make provision for the safety of people engaged in work involving the use, or sale, or purchase of these substances. If that were so, the latter portion of the Bill would be quite adequate. If the Minister disagrees with me it is hard to understand Part II. Section 10 provides that no person shall import any explosives except in accordance with a licence granted by the Minister. Surely the Minister for Labour is an odd person to be entrusted with the right to decide whether explosives shall come into the country. I would think that the Minister for Defence would be the proper person and, failing him, the Minister for Justice and, failing him, the Minister for Industry and Commerce. If I were asked on a quiz programme what Minister would grant a licence for the import of explosives I could be pardoned if I put the Minister for Labour at the bottom of the list.

Mr. Donegan

The Deputy would not win the prize.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I would say the Minister for Defence, the Minister for Justice or the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Those are the three who would occur to me immediately. Section 11 provides that no person shall keep any explosive except in the licensed factory in which it is manufactured or in a magazine licensed by the Minister. I would certainly think that Part II falls within the ambit of the Minister for Justice. Section 18 provides for the keeping of records. What has that got to do with safety?

Mr. Cluskey

It depends on whose safety.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Section 18 provides:

The licensee of a factory or magazine shall keep in such form as the Minister may direct a daily record of the quantities of explosives taken into and out of the premises...

Surely the whole object of section 18 is to keep a check on explosives, to see where they are going, and to see who is purchasing them and to enable them to be traced. Petroleum is the same.

I thoroughly agree with the Government that the Bill is necessary and we will give it to the Minister. It is outrageous that, as at present, explosives should be stored in comparatively large quantities in isolated places where they can be stolen in the middle of the night and used for illegal purposes. Subsection (5) of section 29 provides for the setting up of a tribunal for the purposes of conducting investigations. The subsection reads:

The tribunal shall have for the purposes of the investigation all the powers of a Justice of the District Court when hearing a prosecution for an offence under this Act, and all the powers of an inspector under this Act...

This is one of the sections that get this Assembly into trouble and which end up in the Supreme Court with somebody challenging the constitutionality of the Act. Does that mean that the tribunal can sentence somebody for contempt of court? Does it mean that the tribunal can hold somebody in contempt of court, convict him and sentence him to a fine and imprisonment? If it does, I think this is the performance of judicial function by someone who was not appointed as a judge under the Constitution. Like the inquiry into the funds for the North it will end up by being held to be unconstitutional. The Minister and his advisers should have another look at that subsection.

The Coroners Act is amended to a considerable extent by section 28. I suppose there is nothing wrong with those amendments. I would have thought that a lot of the powers being taken in this Bill were already available under the Factories Act. I suppose they would all be available in relation to a premises which was considered to be a factory. I suppose the object of this Bill is to extend them to premises which would not be a factory within the meaning of the Factories Act.

I would not have spoken on this Stage of the Bill but for the fact that Deputy Belton's approach struck me as very reasonable. This is essentially a Bill to control the purchase, storing and sale of gelignite and kindred substances.

Mr. P. Belton

Correct.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I suppose it does not matter which Minister has control of it so long as it is controlled. It would appear to me that two-thirds of the Bill, or four-fifths as Deputy Belton has said, would be much more properly dealt with by the Minister for Justice.

Mr. Donegan

What I have to say will be extremely brief. It will probably be as brief a statement as I ever made in the House. This Bill provides for the storing of explosives in the licensed factory where they are manufactured, in a magazine licensed by the Minister, in a store licensed by a local authority or harbour authority or in accordance with the certificate issued by the Garda authorities. In the present situation gelignite and such substances should be stored in one of two places. They should be stored in the factory in which they are manufactured or, alternatively, in the care of the Irish Army. If gelignite or such substances are to be used industrially they should be conveyed under the guard of the Irish Army in the quantity which is prescribed and they should be used under the surveillance of the Irish Army. I believe that is the proper procedure in this country at this time.

Minister for Labour (Mr. J. Brennan)

I am very grateful indeed for the constructive approach to the Bill. It does not leave much which it would be necessary for me to say at this stage. Most of the references made by Deputies who saw any conflict in the Bill are applicable to the Committee Stage, which will be taken in a fortnight's time and will give them a chance to deal with the matter.

I should like to deal with two aspects of the Bill which have been questioned by the Fine Gael front bench speakers. First of all, I should like to say that if this was a Bill to deal with the criminal side of explosives I would spell it out. Indeed it would be a much bigger Bill, such a Bill as the Minister for Justice intends to bring in and which is necessary.

This Bill has to do with my responsibility in regard to the safety of workers. Everything that is in the Bill is necessary to that end. I was accused of not spelling it out in my opening speech. I thought I had made it quite clear. In the last paragraph I said:

Essentially what I am proposing in this Bill is an updating and extension of safety precautions in the use of explosives and petroleum in industry and trade. Both the workers immediately involved and the general public need the support of these safety measures in their everyday lives. Deputies will have noted that the Bill does not concern itself in any way with the criminal use of explosives which is dealt with in a different code of legislation.

I would not be the appropriate Minister to deal with the criminal use of explosives. However, my Department is deeply concerned with the usage of explosives and dangerous substances in regard to the safety of those persons who are concerned with the manufacture, the packaging, the storing and the transport of these explosives and dangerous substances. We find ourselves in the position, in trying to enforce safety regulations under existing legislation, that our legislation falls far short, when it comes to dangerous substances and explosives, of laying down specifically what would enable us to carry out our functions properly.

It is for that reason and in conjunction with the parties concerned, including the Congress of Trade Unions, the ILO and, I may add, in the light of the EEC requirements which require the categorising of explosive substances, that it is essential to bring before the House this Bill which has been around for a long time. It has been chopped and changed. That is the purpose for which the Bill has been brought in. If we require markings, licensing and other provisions in some sections of the Bill, which would only be concerned with the criminal side, it is because it is necessary, if we are to safeguard the lives of the people who are handling these substances, that we should know who handles them, where they are being handled and who has the right to handle them. If we are to get tabs on the people who are handling these substances we must do it by way of compelling them to be licensed and by providing that only those who have the right to be licensed should have the right to handle them.

We cannot undertake to protect the safety of the people working with these dangerous substances in all their various stages, whether transport, sale, packaging, manufacture or otherwise, if we are to allow indiscriminate use of them. It is a first essential to establish who the people entitled to use these dangerous substances are and from there on to try and enforce certain regulations which will not indeed of themselves eliminate the dangers but which will minimise them and make it easier for those working with the substances concerned to avoid the dangers involved.

Deputy Desmond was correct when he said that unfortunately many of the industrial accidents we experience are not due always to inexperienced people but are very often due to those who are most experienced, and very often to those who become so accustomed to dealing with dangerous substances that they take risks. That is the reason it is so necessary to try to get our legislation observed and the persons responsible, the employers and the employees, to co-operate in observing the precautions necessary to avoid accidents, fatal and otherwise.

The number of accidents in industries increased last year. In fact, it has reached an alarming stage. The number of fatal accidents has increased and also the number of accidents generally. If one is to take a purely material view of it this is a loss to industry but it is also a loss to humanity, particularly when the lives lost are breadwinners of families and their widows are left with families to rear.

Mr. P. Belton

The Minister has not enough safety first officers. He should recruit enough of them.

Mr. J. Brennan

Practically all accidents can be avoided. We probably have not enough inspectors, although we have a good many. We are continually adding to the number. None of the accidents I have heard of in the last year—all the fatal accidents are reported to me—could be attributed to the lack of activity of the inspectors. I have said very often in the House, and I want to put it on the record again, that our inspectorate are a very dedicated, hard working body of people. We are finding it difficult to get suitable inspectors because the standard required as a result of technological advances and the type of thing which has necessitated this Bill makes it more difficult to find the type of inspector, with all the necessary qualifications, to be able to properly enforce the regulations. I should like to say that our inspectors are not just there to be sent out to prosecute somebody after an accident occurs, although that is part of their duty. I would much prefer that they be invited in by the people in industries to instruct them on what to do and to see that proper safety committees are set up. There should be an awareness of the activities of NISO, the National Industrial Safety Organisation, in each particular factory, project and concern and everything possible should be done to ensure that the necessary safety precautions are taken.

We have a set of rules which specify practically everything that is required particularly in the construction industry with regard to scaffolding, dismantling of scaffolding, the appointment of safety officers, and so on. These are issued to the people concerned.

We read every day of accidents occurring in industry and we have got to bring home to people in a forceful way, preferably by co-operation, the understanding that lives can and must be saved if the necessary precautions are taken. Our existing legislation dealing with dangerous substances and explosives is antiquated, going back to the last century. It did not visualise many of the things we have to deal with now. One does not have to go into complicated details to refer to a number of them.

This Bill is designed to enable the Minister for Labour to make regulations to cover existing situations and any new situations which may arise from time to time. We can visualise certain products and substances not now in common use but which will be in the near future with technological advances. The Bill gives the Minister power by statutory regulation to cover these. I should like to assure the House that as far as the Government and I are concerned we desire only to bring up to date our safety regulations in order to protect the lives of persons involved in the handling of dangerous substances and if this legislation extends to the general public it is not a bad thing. The legislation enables us to deal with persons involved in the transport, storage and packaging of dangerous substances. In this we are concerned with the safety of the public at large.

I am taking power with regard to the conduct of inspectors who have to enter premises to probe accidents. These powers are similar to those already in existence. It is necessary to follow up accidents to find out as far as possible the cause of the accidents and to determine whether there has been criminal negligence on the part of anybody.

Deputy Desmond referred to some of the firms which deal with cartridge powered tools. I should like to assure him and the House that there is no desire on my part to persecute anybody who is giving good employment because he handles something that would come under the provisions of the Bill. We will attempt to make it as easy as possible for all concerned. All we seek is that the necessary precautions are taken.

I had representations from the firm referred to by Deputy Belton and they have been given the necessary assurance that their fears can be easily allayed. I have arranged for them to meet some of my officials. The Bill is overdue and I am glad it has been welcomed on all sides of the House. I hope it will contribute to the avoidance of many accidents which might otherwise occur. There have been accidents which have not resulted in loss of life but they were nevertheless serious accidents in which people were marked for life. Accidents have occurred through the handling of acids and other such substances which have come into use as part of technological advances. All the substances referred to in the Bill are not explosives. There are others which can have serious effects, many of them being potential killers and it is vital that they become known as such and handled accordingly.

The reason the Minister for Labour is handling this Bill is that it is entirely appropriate to safety in employment. The code of legislation dealing with the criminal use of explosives is one which the Minister for Justice will be dealing with shortly. It will contain a great many provisions not mentioned here, dealing with ammunition and firearms. Deputies may wish to study this Bill in greater detail—I do not know whether amendments will be necessary—and I, therefore, do not propose to look for the Committee Stage today.

If any other Minister has power to grant a licence this would seem to revoke that power.

Mr. J. Brennan

It does not revoke anything. Permits and certificates are possibly issued at the present time to users of explosives.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): It is a very definite section.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 23rd February, 1972.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 9 Feb 1972

Private Business. - Dangerous Substances Bill, 1970: Second Stage.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 9 Feb 1972