This Bill represents the most radical initiative as regards safety and health at work since the foundation of the State. Its purpose is to put in place a comprehensive new approach to safety and health at work. It reflects the needs of our working populations at this stage of our development and is in keeping with our membership of the European Community. It has one clear objective — to help reduce accidents and ill health at work and thus reduce both human loss and suffering and the heavy financial associated costs. It will provide a sound basis where employers, workers and the self-employed can solve their problems in a spirit of co-operation, with the support and guidance of the State. The primary responsibility will, however, remain with those who sponsor enterprise and manage the workplace. The new legislation will apply to all persons engaged in work activities of any description, whether those persons are employees, employers or the self-employed. This is in line with Article 45.4.2 of the Constitution which requires the State "to endeavour to ensure that the strength and health of workers shall not be abused".
The Bill fulfils an important commitment by the Government in the Programme for National Recovery. It follows closely the main recommendations of the Barrington Commission of Inquiry on Safety, Health and Welfare at Work, on which both sides of industry as well as Government were represented.
The Bill has been drafted following extensive consultation with the two sides of industry on the Interim Board for Occupational Safety and Health. I can, with confidence, say that there is overall acceptance of the legislation among those to whom it will apply.
The Barrington Commission's examination of occupational safety and health was the first such comprehensive study conducted in Ireland. Its investigations were timely, coinciding with a period of rapid and sustained technological change at the place of work. The commission found that existing safety legislation was severely limited both in its scope and in its ability to help overcome the safety and health hazards which can arise in the modern workplace.
The Bill is not intended solely as an extension to existing statute law on safety and health. The Barrington Commission itself queried whether safety and health could be advanced by an excessive reliance on detailed and increasingly complex regulations imposed from outside the workplace. It accepted, of course, that the law has a role to play but considered that its success depends on a clear recognition by employers, workers, the self-employed and others of their various responsibilities.
We must accept that, in our society, those who create and manage risks at the workplace are in the best position to take appropriate preventive action. This can only be achieved where safety and health issues are accorded equal priority with other aspects of the firm's activities.
Occupational safety and health considerations must, therefore, permeate the whole operational strategy. The essential elements of this approach are the provision of a safe place of work, safe plant and equipment, a safe system of work and adequately trained and informed personnel who are conscious of the safety risks and the methods of prevention. The role of the State should be to provide necessary supervision and give support through advice and guidance. This is the fundamental philosophy on which the present Bill is based.
The legislation is designed to encourage consultation and dialogue at the workplace on relevant safety and health matters. Consultation and consensus at national level is also a key feature of the Bill. This will take place through the new National Authority for Occupational Safety and Health, which I will describe later. It has long been the policy of my Department to promote dialogue between employers' and workers' organisations and other bodies involved in safety and health. I accept, however, the validity of the Barrington Commission's comments that such consultation may in some instances have been limited as those bodies would be reacting to proposals which had developed in a fairly final form. Under the new system the social partners, through their involvement in the national Authority, will have a direct input into planning and policy at the highest level from the earliest stage. I am confident that the spirit of positive co-operation which was evident in both the Barrington Commission and the interim board will manifest itself also in the Authority's operations.
Our present system of occupational safety and health is geared almost exclusively to factories, mines and quarries and the construction sector. It covers about 20 per cent of the workforce. The commission was concerned that areas such as agriculture, forestry, fishing, transport, laboratories and hospitals were not covered. Also many self-employed persons in construction, commerce, agriculture, forestry and fishing were outside the system. The commission argued that the new system should, as a matter of principle, cover all workers.
It is now a feature of our manpower programmes to find persons undergoing training for employment or work experience working alongside employed persons to gain experience and learn essential skills. Young persons undergoing such training can be particularly vulnerable, given their lack of familiarity with the world of work. Special provision is made, therefore, to treat them as employees for the purposes of safety and health protection while they are in the workplace.
The Bill acknowledges that primary responsibility for safety and health rests with the enterprise. It provides effectively also for the allocation of responsibilities for aspects of safety and health within the hierarchy of the enterprise. The employer has an obligation to provide necessary supervision and to name in the safety statement those persons responsible for performing tasks related to safety and health.
The growth in the area of subcontracting in many sectors of employment can lead to a degree of confusion as to responsibility for particular accidents or diseases in the workplace. It could very well be inappropriate to require by law that one or other employer in that situation be held legally responsible overall for all workers in a particular place of work. While each employer will carry a responsibility in the matter, the requirements in the Bill inevitably mean that the interests of other workers close by must be taken into account. Ultimately, the courts are in the best position, having had access to the facts in each particular case, to decide which employer is responsible if an accident or disease occurs.
Owing to the limited scope of the existing legal system overall data is not available on occupational accidents generally, whether fatal or non-fatal. An indication of the extent of the problem, however, may be got from the limited data available. For example, the total number of accidents reported to my Department in respect of factories, construction sites and mines and quarries is still over 3,000 per year. These do not include accidents resulting in less than three day's absence from work. In the case of the 80 per cent of occupations outside the scope of existing legislation there are no reliable statistics to show the number of accidents occurring annually.
In the agricultural sector, while there are no figures available on the total number of accidents at work, a recent survey concluded that there may be as many as three farming deaths for every fatality in industry. Non-fatal injuries on farms are comparable with those in all other industries even though there are fewer workers in farming. Another source of data is the occupational injuries benefit scheme which receives claims in respect of occupational injury or disease at the rate of about 16,000 per year.
In addition to the serious consequences which accidents at work can have in human terms for the victims and their dependants, they also give rise to heavy financial costs for the individual, the enterprise and the economy as a whole. They can seriously impair the individual's earning capacity and employment potential as well as the quality of his or her life. They can lead to lost production, lost orders and increased longer-term operational costs. They result in a serious drain on public expenditure through the occupational injuries benefits fund. They have a direct bearing on the cost of employers' liability insurance cover. The Barrington Commission drew attention to the widely expressed concern about insurance compensation costs. The Programme for National Recovery recognised that the enactment of this Bill and its enforcement could facilitate reductions in employers' liability insurance costs.
The social dimension necessary to achieve a single European market by 1992 means that many of our activities and policies on safety and health are influenced by European Community Directives and developments. The creation of the single European market will provide an enormous opportunity for economic development provided that we are properly prepared for it.
While much of the focus of the single market is the elimination throughout member states of various restrictions which up to now acted as barriers to trade, the Council of Ministers places particular emphasis also on the social dimension. The European Commission has proposed a number of new directives aimed at protecting the safety and health of workers in the context of increasing economic activity. Our existing safety and health legislation is inadequate to implement many of the European Community proposals as they stand. However, the Bill provides a basis for meeting many of the requirements of those proposals.
Unlike existing safety and health legislation which tends to deal with detailed specific requirements, this Bill sets out broad general duties of care for all employers, employees and the self-employed. Broadly speaking, those general duties of care involve the provision of a safe place of work, safe plant and equipment and safe system of work. Other requirements include giving those at risk adequate training and information about the relevant hazards and the steps taken to deal with them.
The Bill also places broad general duties of care on those who design, manufacture, import, supply, install etc., articles or substances for use at work. A legal framework is provided in the Bill for elaborating on the general requirements, where necessary, by way of codes of practice or by regulations to be made by the Minister. It will be for the Authority to make proposals to the Minister in this regard, having consulted with both sides of industry.
The Fourth Schedule to the Bill lists in detail the issues which may be the subject of regulations. For example, the Authority may recognise a need to provide detailed regulations in relation to the health hazards presented by toxic substances.
In addition to the general duties placed on employers, employees, the self-employed etc., the Bill also contains other key provisions. These are provisions relating to safety statements, consultations between workers and employers at the place of work, on safety and health matters and the establishment of a National Authority for Occupational Safety and Health.
Section 12 is an important provision which requires employers to draw up safety statements based on identification of risks in the workplace and the necessary preventive measures. The Authority will provide more detailed guidance on safety statements in due course.
Section 13, which provides for consultation at the place of work, will require employers to consult their employees on matters relating to safety, health and welfare. Employees will have the right to choose the type of consultative mechanism best suited for those purposes. The Bill specifically enables employees to appoint safety representatives to represent them in consultations with their employer and to carry out a range of other functions provided for in the Bill including the carrying out of inspections and the investigation of accidents and dangerous occurrences at the place of work.
As regards the consultative mechanisms necessary, the Bill allows for a flexible approach which can be adapted by codes of practice or by regulation for particular sectors of employment. This approach is more suited to the special characteristics and needs of each particular place of work than was possible, for example, under the corresponding provisions of the Safety in Industry Acts. Adequate consultation between employers and workers is a key feature of the new system. The Barrington Commission said that the rigid prescription in the Safety in Industry Acts as regards the size and type of safety committees required could discourage effective dialogue. I believe that the formula provided for in this Bill meets those criticisms. I would stress, however, that existing safety committees established under the Safety in Industry Acts which function adequately to the satisfaction of the employer and the workers may be endorsed by the Authority as complying with the formula set out in the Bill. I know that much good work has been carried out in recent years as regards training in the operation of safety committees and the Bill is not intended to undermine those where they are operating satisfactorily and meeting the consultative needs of both workers and employers.
While the Bill is directed primarily towards employers, employees and the self-employed, it also provides for the safety and health of non-employees affected by work activities.
The Bill does not cover matters such as general environmental issues, which are properly the responsibility of other Government Departments and institutions.
It will however have some important applications such as, for instance, in school or university laboratories or in places where young persons help out employers without being employed by them. In general, however, the Authority being established under the Bill will be expected to concentrate its efforts in the area of worker protection. In areas where the predominant risk is to the public, it would not be for the Authority to be involved in safeguarding the public against that risk.
At national level, one of the major changes under the Bill will be the establishment of a National Authority for Occupational Safety and Health. The Authority will have a clear, identifiable and undisputed responsibility for issues relating to occupational safety and health at all places of work. It will be responsible for the general administration of the new system and it will be required to provide advice and information for employers and workers to assist them in meeting their obligations.
The Barrington Commission was very clear in its report that the new system of safety and health, in which a major responsibility would be shared by both sides of industry, depended on the establishment of a tripartite body with executive powers and power to recruit its own staff. The Authority, accordingly, will be a State-sponsored body. The board will have a chairman, three employers' representatives, three workers' representatives and four representatives of the State or other appropriate bodies.
The structure of the board of the Authority gives employers' and workers' representatives a major share in responsibility for the development and implementation of overall policy on safety and health at work at national level. I intend making provision in due course for employee participation at subboard level in the Authority, in line with the provisions applying to a large number of State bodies under the Worker Participation (State Enterprises) Act, 1988.
It will be essential for the Authority in developing its policies to be able to avail of the advice of advisory committees representatives of sectoral and other expert interests. The committees will provide an advisory mechanism through which the Authority can obtain the valuable input of many organisations which have expressed a wish to contribute to the evolution of occupational safety and health arrangements.
Given the responsibilities to be allocated to the Authority in terms of developing safety and health policy and its enforcement, I concur with the Barrington Commission's conclusion that it should have independent control over its own staff. The Authority will, therefore, be able to recruit its own staff subject to the usual controls that apply in the case of public sector bodies. Initially the Authority will be staffed by civil servants designated by the Minister for Labour for employment by the Authority. The Bill contains the usual provisions regarding preservation of pay and conditions of employment of transferred civil servants.
The Authority will be financed by the Exchequer and it will be subject to all the standards accounting and reporting controls that apply to public sector bodies.
The Authority will have overall responsibility for enforcing the new legislation and the existing enactments on safety and health. However, other bodies such as local authorities may be prescribed in regulations under the Bill as "enforcing agencies" to enforce the provisions in lieu of the Authority in specified cases or areas. In such cases, it will be for the Authority in the first instance to examine the matter and to make proposals to the Minister.
Inspectors of the Authority and enforcing agencies will have a standard set of general enforcement powers under the legislation, such as the power to enter places of work and to carry out examinations at the place of work of articles and substances found there. Those powers largely reflect the powers currently exercised by industrial inspectors under the existing safety enactments. Some modifications and additional general powers are, however, incorporated in the Bill.
The Bill also provides for a range of new or modified specific enforcement measures which may be used by inspectors, including improvement directions and plans, improvement notices and prohibition notices.
Where these enforcement measures do not have the desired effect or where there are serious or persistent contraventions of the legislation, it is essential to be able to prosecute. The Bill provides for a comprehensive range of offences which may be tried either summarily or on indictment. The Bill provides for a range of penalties which are designed to act as real deterrents. Many offences under the Bill are liable to attract fines of up to £1,000 on summary conviction in the District Court.
As amended in the Dáil, the Bill leaves unspecified the level of fine which may be imposed on conviction on indictment. It will be for the courts, therefore, to decide the level of fine having regard to the circumstances of the cases before them. For a limited number of offences, including breach of a prohibition notice, a person convicted on indictment may be liable, together with or instead of a fine, to imprisonment for up to two years.
The existing enactments of safety and health at work, including the Safety in Industry Acts, the Mines and Quarries Act and their Regulations, will initially stay in place alongside the general provisions of the Bill. However, certain provisions of those enactments will be repealed automatically as corresponding provisions of the Bill are brought into operation in order to avoid overlapping or duplication. The Authority will be obliged to keep existing legislation under review and the remaining provisions of those enactments, based on recommendations of the Authority, may be repealed as necessary over a period of time by order of the Minister under the Bill and may be replaced by regulations and/or codes of practice under the Bill.
Ensuring safety and health at work does not, of necessity, involve great expenditure. Analysis of the accidents in industry reported to my Department indicate that many are due to such factors as objects or persons falling, the handling of equipment or goods and people stepping on or hitting objects. The elimination of these risks is not necessarily expensive and may not call for protective equipment and devices. Indeed, reduction of accidents may itself reduce workplace costs.
I am convinced that most low technology accidents can be eliminated if a clear priority is given to safety and health in the workplace, if there is better training and supervision, if good housekeeping practices are followed, and if the hazards are identified and the necessary information given to workers through the consultative process. Above all, employers must not believe that accidents are inevitable or that they are caused by careless or accident-prone workers. They must recognise that most often accidents are a human rather than a technical problem and that efforts by them, as employers, to train their workers about how to deal with workplace hazards will be rewarded by a reduction in accidents.
The Barrington Commission made it clear that, at the level of the State, the large task of ensuring the safety and health of all workers will have to be tackled on a phased basis. The new Authority will need to decide its strategy for achieving this and to make proposals as regards its resource needs. The Government will consider those proposals from the standpoint of seeking to achieve, efficiently and effectively, the objectives of this legislation.
If the implementation of the provisions of the Bill is to be successful in improving the health and safety of our workers, it will require a commitment from employers, workers and their respective organisations at all levels. The co-operation of workers and employers is central to the success of the proposed new system. This is reflected in the Bill which provides that workers and employers will be represented on the board of the new Authority. In this way they will have a major input into formulating and implementing safety and health policy at the very highest levels. In view of the cooperation which has already been shown during the deliberations of the Barrington Commission and the Interim Board for Occupational Safety and Health, I am confident that this spirit of co-operation and goodwill will ensure the effectiveness of the new system.
I look forward to a constructive debate and I will consider carefully all reasonable proposals which the House may have to improve the Bill.
I commend the Bill to the House.
