Posted By Philosophical Why? What is the justification? Would it improve health and safety on the railways? Was the accident due to just one individual's negligence? Isn't it time that we started to put all of this in some sort of context?

Posted By David Brede The Railway Specialist Group held a very informative seminar some two years ago where the issue of corporate manslaughter was the main topic and in particular the circumstances surrounding the incidents at Ladbroke Grove and Southall. The Potters Bar incident was still to happen. Certainly I came away from that meeting more convinced that Corporate Manslaughter has to have its day and that prosecutions would focus boardroom minds on the issue of safety. I agree with John Allen that the cost of train delays seems to be a greater burden than the cost of accidents. Fortunately accidents are rare on railways as a whole. Certainly the audit trail of mishaps in this incident cover a wide range of personnel from the those responsible for the training and recruitment of the driver, the processes involved in the identification and rectification of signal that the driver missed and so on. So far the successful prosecutions of corporate manslaughter have been limited to small firms where the chain of command are short and direct. Perhaps in the light of this the issue should be revisited. So for the time being we should take comfort that the record fine held by the Port Ramsgate incident has now been exceeded by this case. David Brede Chair Railway Specialist Group.

Posted By Adrian Watson Dear all, I am amongst those who wonder why we need corporate manslaughter. At present we have the opportunity to convict individuals of manslaughter or use s37 for H&S offences where they've clearly been culpable and somebody has died or seriously injured as a result. As most of us know the problem lies in that in most cases it is not an individual at fault. It is a culmination of acts and omissions within and beyond a company that produces a situation that culminates in an incident, so why blame individuals. As the facts of the end result speak for themselves, everbody knows who's at fault. However, people either forget or don't realise, that the end result is only readily foreseeable with the benefit of hindsight. Unfortunately, the individuals involved don't have the benefit of hindsight at the time! Why don't we have a more rational debate than "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"? Health and safety will not improve until and unless we get away from the blame game and identify what went wrong and why. This will not and cannot happen if every time HSE, the LA or the police investigate an accident if the primary focus of their investigations is to find those culpable. This can only taint the investigation from the beginning. If you make an error, are you likely to exclaim "mea culpa!" if you are likely to go to jail? I would like to see a day where: The enforcers do their job and enforce the law using the tools that they have been given and advise those who are confused or want to go beyond the law. This will hopefully ensure that there is a level playing field throughout businesses. The courts disqualify directors, prevent the award of bonuses and share options, order directors and managers to carry out community service, as well as direct companies to improve their health and safety systems or be wound up. Insurance companies recover monies paid out for claims where a company has not met its statutory obligations and somebody has been injured. Shareholders sack individual directors and boards of directors for poor safety performance and take action to recover monies paid out from directors in fines and claims where the company has not met its statutory obligations because of the act, default or sufferance of the directors. These would force shareholders, directors and managers to sit up and take notice more than the politicians whipping up the crowds every time there is an incident when they don't have the facts. Well I can hope and pigs might fly! Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Adrian Watson Raymond, I don't disagree with you that directors should be held accountable where their acts or omissions are directly responsible for a death but how will corporate manslaughter make any difference? At present, if a director is grossly reckless then he can be prosecuted and convicted of manslaughter. It is only where there is a large company is there is a difficulty with identifying the directing mind of the company and thus in getting a conviction for manslaughter. So my question remains, as you cannot send a company to prison, what is the benefit of corporate manslaughter? Furthermore fines don't work either. If you fine a public body you are fining the public, as the public has to make up the difference in taxes. If you fine a PLC then the directors don't pay, so the fine doesn't hold them accountable, and the shareholders don't see the fines, so they don't hold the directors responsible. It's only in a small private company where fines make a difference, because in that case the directors are the shareholders and as such they personally suffer. In most cases all fines do is distort the company's priorities for a year or so whilst they are fresh in everybody's minds. Regards Adrian Watson.