Posted By CFT
I thought similar whilst choking on my porridge this am.

CFT

Posted By Glen Coe
no point in fining or suing anyone who does not have the money to pay. But in this case probably proportional to their ability to pay.

Posted By Tarquin Farquor
Very valid points indeed Crim and Glen.

To advance an advocacy,

Run a business, get any profits off of the books as soon as possible, have no regard for H&S (or other practices), receive a lower fine following an incident, carry on trading.

Should such a business have been allowed to carry on trading?

If for providing sick pay a civil claim for compensation / damages would suffice (assuming they were insured)?

For continuing to provide employment the people in the area have suffered this event and then have to see their friends / relatives returning to work there. I would not like to walk my children past the factory on their way to school.

I agree with your comments in the current framework, its just that I don't think that the framework is right and I don't know what the answer is.

Posted By Tarquin Farquor
I'm not sure Crim,

If the Act were applicable at the time of the incident it would be incoincidental with regards to the level of fine and the continuation of trading if the sane descion framework were applied.

But we live in hope....