Vol. 413 No. 1
15 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the progress which has been made with regard to the introduction of EC proposals for improved safety standards on building sites; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
A proposal for a directive on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites was considered at the Social Affairs Council of Ministers meeting held on 14 October 1991. Considerable progress was achieved and a common position was reached on the proposal. It is anticipated that the Directive will be adopted at the Social Affairs Council meeting in December 1991. The expected date by which the proposed directive will be required to be implemented into national legislation is 31 December 1993.
I welcome that apparent indication of progress from the Minister. Is the Minister aware that the EC has calculated that although the workforce on building sites in Ireland constitutes only 7 per cent of the total, it accounts for 20 per cent of the accidents, and that the accident rate on Irish building sites is the worst in Europe? We have a very high incidence of serious accidents and the EC has concluded that urgent measures are necessary to improve the extent of contact between multiple onsite smaller contractors.
I do not accept that our record is the worst in Europe. The level of serious accidents on building sites is a matter of concern. In Ireland last year seven fatalities and 247 accidents on construction sites involving absence from work of more than three days were reported to the health and safety officer in 1990. That is far too many. The Deputy will know that the inspectorate enforce the legislation which governs safety and health requirements on construction sites and that they have devoted a considerable level of their inspection activities towards monitoring and enforcing the legislation which applies to the construction sector. Far from being in any way laggard in meeting the standard being proposed by the European Community, we very much want to see this being introduced. The Deputy's suggestions that we have the worst record in Europe does not accord with the facts. We have to recognise that building sites by their nature are hazardous places. We are anxious to ensure that a whole range of practical measures are introduced and the Deputy can rest assured that we will be in the van in relation to the proposed directive.
Is the Minister not aware that the member states can apply for a derogation unless the work is deemed to be particularly dangerous and that there are further conditions whereby there will have to be more than 20 workers on the site and the job will have to last 30 days with a minimum of 500 man hours work on the site? If these proposals are not compulsory, it is possible to create a potentially dangerous situation. The compromise agreement reached on 14 October still exposes the workforce on these sites to quite a lot of danger.
Ireland supports this proposal enthusiastically. We have recognised the hazards associated with the construction industry. We have devoted a considerable amount of attention towards increasing the awareness of the workers as to the hazards and we have devoted many efforts towards reducing the level of accidents in the sector. I do not say there are not hazards attached to the construction industry — I know that from my involvement in law — and if the proposed directive has implications for our construction sector we will make sure they are taken fully into account and we will ensure that they will not in any way act as a barrier against implementation. The obligations which will arise from this directive will not be dissimilar to those imposed on employers under the requirements of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 1989. The Deputy should not always present Ireland as being forced to comply with EC Directives. It is not right to give that impression.
We are party to the agreement. We are not being forced.
I will call Deputies offering, if they will be brief.
Is the Minister not aware that before any compulsion can be applied the job must last 30 days and there must be at least 20 people employed on site? Is the Minister suggesting that if a job lasts only 28 days there will be no danger involved?
The Deputy already put that question. I am calling Deputy Shatter.
That is what the directive says.
What the Deputy is now taking issue with is the directive.
We are party to that agreement.
I repeat that we have indicated that we are supporting this directive, but——
What I am trying to say is that there are flaws in the directive.
——I would also indicate that our existing legislation with regard to building construction regulations and so on will remain. If there is a gap our legislation is there to protect. The Deputy should not take the view that as a consequence of this directive being adopted conditions will be less satisfactory from the workers' point of view.
Let us have finality on this question.
Will the Minister say if additional domestic legislation will now be prepared to implement the terms of the Directive so that we comply with this requirement? In the light of the figures the Minister has given, will he agree that in the interests of safety the date by which the directive must be implemented is the latest date and that there is no particular reason why such legislation could not be introduced in the House at an early stage? Would he finally agree that the issues which Deputy O'Sullivan raised can be addressed in our domestic legislation and that the directive, which I would describe as minimalistic, does nothing to prevent us from applying more stringent criteria to guarantee safety?
That is the point I was making — we have our own legislation. I do not accept that the standards required by Europe are way above what we have in place. There have been major improvements in the building regulations over the years. Perhaps our regulations could be more stringent but Deputies will find that they are already more strict than those that apply in most European countries. We will discharge our responsibility. We will be able to adopt this directive and at the same time we will be able to protect the interest of workers on building sites by strengthening our own legislation if necessary.
How can the Minister suggest that we are on par with Europe when we account for only 7 per cent of the workforce and 20 per cent of the accidents? Will he tell the House when he expects the directive, which he expects to be concluded in December of this year, to be incorporated into domestic law?
In talking about Europe the Deputy is talking about a very wide variety of systems and practices on building sites and elsewhere. He may say we account for only 7 per cent of the workforce and 20 per cent of the accidents, but I do not accept that that is the case.
They are EC figures.
The Deputy said we had the worst record. There are other countries where the accident rates, realtively, are much higher than they are here. The Deputy knows that. Other countries, for instance, the Federal Republic of Germany, have a very much lower accident rate because of sophisticated developments. I do not accept that we have the worst record, or nearly the worst record, in the European Community.
Has the Minister identified the most common causes of accidents on Irish building sites?
I have not. If that question had been asked of me I am sure the committee investigating this could have drawn my attention to it. I can only give the Deputy a top of the head reaction which is not what he would want. Having been involved in a number of law actions, I could relate my experience, but that is not what the Deputy wants. If the Deputy would write to me directly on that I might be able to give him some information.
I am sure the Minister is aware of the number of Irish people who are employed on building sites, particularly in Great Britain. Will he ensure that this directive is applied just as thoroughly in the British operations as they are in this country because as many accidents and difficulties have arisen in British building operations as in Ireland? I am sure the Minister would be just as sympathetic to the problems of the Irish in Britain as he is to those of the Irish operating here.
Indeed I am, even though I do not have a statutory responsibility. In fact, I will be meeting representatives of that community before the end of this week. What the Deputy is saying seems contrary to what Deputy Rabbitte was saying a moment ago. I will not comment on the standards of another member state beyond saying I am satisfied that we can and do discharge our own responsibility.
