I read this case a few days ago and find it a bit rich (sorry about the pun) the HSE get let off with a Crown Censure, when they prosecute for lesser breaches and those companies get fined large amounts of money.

https://www.ioshmagazine.com/article/shielding-crown

Crown Censure is as a funny beast. It is seen by outsiders as the government “getting away with it” but exactly what are they “getting away with”? Then only significant penalty that can be imposed on an organisation is a fine, but the fine then goes back to the government so the Treasury gives some money to the Department being prosecuted who then pays it to the Courts Service who then pay it back to the Treasury: a bit pointless (of course, remember that the lawyers will take a cut of this money as it goes around).

The HSE does take Crown Censures seriously ( was involved in one some years ago: it’s why I ended up in H&S) and does not give the department involved any slack, in fact looking back at the case I was involved in I think that they might have been a bit harsh and they possibly would not of prosecuted the agency for in court.

Applying Crown Censure against themselves is bit odd. I always thought that just as the HSE investigated local authorities that contravened the Health and Safety at Work Act, local authorities investigated the HSE.  Must have misread that.

Originally Posted by: Hsquared14

The state cannot prosecute itself so Crown Censure is the way that enforcement of law is reflected in Govenment departments.  Everyone in the Civil Service takes Crown Censure very seriously - it is a career killer and heads do roll, I can assure you that no one "gets away" with anything!

Definitely a career killer: I have heard rumours of knighthoods going missing after a Crown Censure. To people in the private sector this might not mean much but for senior civil servants getting a measly CBE when you were expecting a KBE is a real kick in the teeth.   

You can also argue that fines do not affect large companies. The money for the fine does not come out of the shareholder’s dividends but is simply passed onto consumers as higher prices. I have not yet heard a fine (for an H&S offence) that has imposed any sort of hardship on a FTSE 100 company as oppose to the SME’s that usually go under. Perhaps going after the body corporate is a bit pointless and we should just focus on the individuals?

PS most civil servants I have worked with are not faceless, they just have this strange rictus from having to work with the idiot politicians that you, the great British public keep electing.

It does seem a bit odd for an organisation to be investigating itself for an offence, where's the transparency? At best, it could result in purely internal politics coming into play, at worst it could result in a whitewash. Surely some independence could be brought into play, as has been suggested, whereby local authorities do the investigation, but then would that result in some old scores being settled?

List of Crown Censures since April 1999 is here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/prosecutions/documents/crowncensures.htm

There is a short summary which to be honest is similar to what you get in the summary of court case. (Note it is always assumed that the recipient of the Crown Censure has “pleaded” guilty)

Originally Posted by: matelot1965

Originally Posted by: biker1

It does seem a bit odd for an organisation to be investigating itself for an offence, where's the transparency? At best, it could result in purely internal politics coming into play, at worst it could result in a whitewash. Surely some independence could be brought into play, as has been suggested, whereby local authorities do the investigation, but then would that result in some old scores being settled?

Good point biker were is the transparency ? Perhaps the Irish H+S Authority or an independent body of respected H+S professionals could investigate to ensure transparency ?

Any reason why you suggested the Irish H & S Authority?  Should we open it up and let the EU decide, with member states policing each other?

“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” The problem is of course the issue of expertise: the HSE are generally accepted as the experts on H&S related issues so, if they don’t lead investigations who will?  We could set up a special independent investigation unit but as this Crown Censure is the first time this has happened, they would not be very busy. If there was any allegations of a cover up then the authorities (eg the police) would intervene (eventually) to investigate. There might even be some publicity in the media to gee things along. I think a certain level of transparency exists but most of the time, people just can’t be bothered looking: if you really want to know more you can always make a Freedom of Information request

"an independent panel of highly respected H&S professionals "- you don't mean members of this forum?  

Realistically:

• who would select this panel?
•  How would you know that they didn’t have a personal axe to grind?
• As well as H&S knowledge would they have the legal knowledge to decide if an actual breach of the regulations had taken place (to the same standard as judge)?
•  How would you appeal a decision?
• What correction action or sanction would the panel be allowed to impose?
• If it was decided  to prosecute individuals ( Crown Immunity only applies to organisations not people) would these hearings muddy the waters legally
• How much would it cost- you’d have to hire a number of experts for several days and pay their expenses and arrange admin support for them. Just for one simple case.  

Edited by user 14 December 2017 10:57:17(UTC)  | Reason: Initially wrote meaningless drivel now it makes sense!

Messey

My comment was just cheap throw away comment and no offence was meant. Indeed it was in relation to a previous comment about civil servants being given honours - I'm sure your'e not high enough up the ladder to worry about that.

For what it's worth, I work in local government...enough said!