This
page looks at the Health and Safety Commission/Executive's
policy towards the disclosure of documents and information.
It is aimed at setting out clearly:
| • |
what
information the HSE and HSC will and will not
provide to members of the public; |
| • |
the
best way of obtaining the information that the
HSE does make public; |
| • |
the
reasons why the HSE will not provide certain information |
| • |
the
adequacy of these reasons; |
It
first sets out what is HSE's general policy.
It then allows you to check whether the HSE will or
will not make available particular categories of information
and how best to obtain it.
It then sets out how you can appeal against a decision
by the HSE not to provide you information.
Contact the Centre
if – having read the material below - you need
further guidance on obtaining information from the
HSE, or on how to appeal a decision.
The
Centre for Corporate Accountability and the Public
Law Project have recently made a number of ‘challenges’
in relation to HSE’s decisions to deny particular
information to a bereaved family, in one case, and
to the CCA, in another. To read about this, Click
Here.
Index
Key Documents and abbreviations
There are a number of key documents. These are summarised
in the main text below to help you understand HSE’s
policy, but you can download them if you would like
to see these documents in full.
| • |
The
most important document is HSE’s General
Administrative Procedure (GAP) 1 - "Open
government – Disclosure of information to
the Public" - which contains instructions
and procedures for HSE staff on how they should
deal with requests for information.
In the text below, it is referred to as "GAP
1"
To download, Click
Here (word doc) |
| • |
"Code
of Practice on Access to Government Information":
This sets out the Government’s policy on
what information government departments should
release. It is published by the Lord Chancellor’s
Department;
In the text below, it is referred to as ‘Open
Government Code’
| To
download, Part 1, Click
Here (word) |
(which
deals with information that should be disclosed) |
| To
download, Part 2, Click
Here (word) |
(which
deals with exemptions) |
|
| • |
Health
and Safety Commission’s Policy Statement
on Open Government
This sets out the Commission’s statement
on openness
In the text below it is referred to as 'HSC’s
Openness Statement'
To download, Click
Here (PDF) |
| • |
Health
and Safety Executive Board Statement on Openness;
This sets out the Executive’s policy on openness
In the text below it is referred to as ‘HSE
Openness Statement’
To see this, Click Here
|
Back to Index
Who
does the HSE view as "members of the public"
According to HSE Guidance, "The "public"
essentially means anyone who does not have official
access to government information, and includes employers,
employees, Members of Parliament (MPs), the European
Parliament (MEPs), the Scottish Parliament (MSPs)
and the National Assembly for Wales (AMs) as well
as lobbying organisations, commercial organisations
and persons overseas.
Click here for more information on how the HSE deals
with MPs.
Back to Index
What
is HSE's Policy
The HSE’s policy is that on request the HSE will
release any information that it holds, unless:
| • |
it
is legally prohibited from doing so: or |
| • |
both
| (a) |
the
Government's Open Government code states
that the information should not be disclosed
and |
| (b) |
disclosure
would cause significant harm |
|
This
policy is set out in HSE’s Openness Statement
and Paras 1.5-1.7 in GAP 1
Therefore in relation to every request the HSE should
be asking the following questions:
| • |
is
it lawful to release the information? If the answer
is 'no', the information can not be released,
and that is the end of the story |
| • |
if
there is nothing in law prohibiting release,
the HSE must ask whether or not it falls into
one of the 15 categories of information contained
in Part 2 of the Open Government Code that are
exempt from release.
If
the information does not fit into one of these
categories, then it should be released even
if release would cause significant harm.
|
| • |
if
the information does fall into one of the exemption
categories, the HSE should ask whether disclosure
will cause "significant harm".
If disclosure would not cause significant harm,
the information should be disclosed |
| • |
If
in the the HSE’s view, disclosure would cause
significant harm, the HSE can still disclose it
if would be in the 'public interest' to do so.
|
In other words, if the HSE is not legally prohibited
from disclosing the information, it must disclose it
unless:
| • |
the
information is one of the exempted categories
in the Open Government Code, and |
| • |
disclosure
would cause significant harm; and
|
| • |
disclosure
would not be in the public interest. |
Back to Index
What does the law say cannot be disclosed
Section 28 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
(the 1974 Act) prohibits the release of two categories
of information which are in the HSE’s possession
• |
a category of information called ‘Relevant
Information" (see S28(1), 1974 Act). This
is principally information which duty holders
have a legal obligation to provide to the HSE.
For example:
| - |
information
about deaths, injuries etc required by the
Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous
Occurrences Regulations 1995. |
| - |
safety
reports required by the Control of Major
Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 COMAH. |
| - |
offshore
safety cases required by the Offshore Installations
(Safety Case) Regulations 1992. |
| ['Relevent
information' also includes information obtained
through the powers of section 27(1)] |
|
| • |
information
obtained by inspectors in the course of their
activities (see S28(7), 1974 Act). This includes
any information – including witness statements
- that inspectors obtain in the course of preventative
inspections or investigations into reported incidents.
|
However Section 28 sets out a number of exemptions.
Both categories of information can be provided in the
following situations:
| • |
the
person who gave the information has consented
to its disclosure.
| It
should be noted that the guidance to inspectors
states that the suppliers of information
"should not be given the opportunity
to make their consent conditional on the
identity of the enquirer or the enquirer’s
purposes." To see the full extract
from GAP, Click Here |
|
| • |
if
disclosure would serve "the purpose of any
function" of the HSC/E.
What are the ‘functions" of the HSC/E?
The key purposes of the HSC/E is set out in section
1(1) of the 1974 Act. These are:
| - |
securing the health, safety and welfare
of persons at work; |
| - |
protecting
persons other than persons at work against
risks to health or safety arising out or
in connection with the activities of persons
at work; |
Guidance to the HSE (Appendix B, Para 1.B12, in
GAP 1) states that information can be released
if it:
"serves
these broad purposes. For instance, disclosure
would be permitted where:
| -
|
its
object is to prevent harm to the public |
| -
|
it
would serve a positive health and
safety purpose, or; |
| -
|
there
is concern amongst the public and
disclosure can allay that concern" |
|
The
guidance also makes the following points:
| - |
The
purpose of disclosure determines whether
it will be lawful, rather than the individual
or body to whom the disclosure is made.
|
| - |
Where
HSE judges that the public, or sectors of
the public, are in need of information for
the purposes described above it is entitled
to disclose it. |
| - |
The
range of circumstances in which disclosure
of information would serve a positive health
and safety purpose is broad, and the HSE
should consider each case on its merits.
|
It
should be noted that whether something is or
is not a 'function" of the HSE is a very
contentious area and one which, in the CCA's
view, the HSE tends to interpret in a conservative
manner.
For example, would providing information to
bereaved families serve 'function" of the
HSC/E?
The HSE does not think so. It states in its
Guidance
"However,
the health and safety purpose must be broader
than, for instance, meeting the natural concerns
of relatives of victims who have died in accidents.....
The provisions of Section 28, as presently
drafted, do not provide for such understandable
concerns, in themselves, to constitute a proper
reason to make a disclosure to victims and
relatives of victims of accidents."
However
it does state that:
"Wherever
possible we should look to provide information
in these circumstances in a redacted form
- i.e., the information should be made available
to the relatives of victims in a way which
does not disclose commercially sensitive or
other confidential material."
For
more information on obtaining witness statements
for the bereaved, prior to an inquest, Click
Here
|
| • |
If
the information is "for the purposes of any
legal proceedings".
If the legal proceedings concern personal injury
compensation claims, the Civil Procedure Rules
state that "legal proceedings" come
into existence once the claim form has been issued.
If you want to read specifically about obtaining
information relating to a civil claim, click here.
It should be noted that the HSE argues that Coroners’
Inquests are not legal proceedings. |
| • |
for
the purposes of a special "inquiry"
set up by the HSC by virtue of section 14(2) of
the Act |
| • |
for the purposes of a report published by the
HSC/E concerning an incident subject to legal
proceedings or subject to a special inquiry (by
virtue of section 14(2)). |
In addition, "relevant information" can be
disclosed
| - |
if
the information is in a form "calculated
to prevent it from being identified as relating
to a particular person or case"
This allows the HSE to release statistical information.
This exemption will not apply if you are seeking
information about a particular company or duty
holder, but it will apply if you are seeking non-company
specific information (i.e. information about RIDDOR
incidents in a particular local authority or a
particular industry.) |
So
in summary
| |
Is
the information sought, ‘relevant information’
or information obtained by the HSE inspectors
in the course of their activities? |
| |
• |
If
it is, then it can only ‘legally’ be
released if it comes in one of the exemptions
set out above. |
| |
• |
If
not, then it can be ‘lawfully’ released |
| |
If
the information can be lawfully released, the
HSE will only do so after consideration of the
‘Open Government Code’ and the ‘Significant
Harm’ test (see below) |
Back to Index
What are the exemptions in the Open Government Code,
Part 2
There are 15 categories. They can be summarised in the
following manner:
| Exemption
1 |
information
which would harm national security, defence or
international relations |
| Exemption
2 |
information
that would harm the frankness and candour of internal
discussion |
| Exemption
4 |
information
which would prejudice law enforcement and legal
proceedings or would harm public order or public
security |
| Exemption
7 |
information
which could harm the management of HSC/E or the
conduct of its operations |
| Exemption
8 |
personnel
records, public appointments, honours |
| Exemption
9 |
vexatious
requests, requests which are manifestly unreasonable
or formulated in too general a manner or would
require an unreasonable diversion of resources
|
| Exemption
10 |
information
about to be published |
| Exemption
11 |
incomplete
analysis, research or statistics or information
held only for the purpose of research and statistics
where the individual record will not be identified
|
| Exemption
12 |
information
that would cause an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy (this exemption is now largely superseded
by protections in the Data Protection Act, see
GAP 37) |
| Exemption
13 |
commercially
confidential information |
| Exemption
14 |
Information
of a confidential nature |
To
downwnload them in full, Click
Here (word)
It
should be notedthat where one of these exemptions
apply, there is an overiding ‘public interest’
test.
The code states that:
"In
those categories which refer to harm or prejudice,
the presumption remains that information should
be disclosed unless the harm likely to arise from
disclosure would outweigh the public interest in
making the information available.
References to harm or prejudice include both actual
harm or prejudice and risk or reasonable expectation
of harm or prejudice. In such cases it should be
considered whether any harm or prejudice arising
from disclosure is outweighed by the public interest
in making information available."
This
would indicate that even when in the HSE’s view
‘significant harm’ might result, it may
still be disclosable - if disclsoure is judged to
be in the public interest.
| |
In
summary: |
| |
|
If
the information does not come within the categories
above, then the HSE should release them (even
if in their view it would cause significant harm). |
| |
| |
|
If
the information does come within the categories
above, the HSE can only deny information, if disclosure
would cause ‘significant harm’ and
disclosure would not be in the 'public interest' |
Back
to Index
Significant Harm
It is for the HSE to decide whether disclosure would
result in significant harm:
Para 1.40 of GAP 1states:
The
degree of harm caused by a disclosure will need
to be assessed in the context of the exemption(s)
concerned - i.e., by referring to the guidance on
interpretation of the specific exemption(s). The
likelihood that some harm or prejudice would occur
should not, in itself, be decisive. For instance,
a disclosure which would prejudice our ability to
prosecute in a particular case will not automatically
amount to significant harm: operating Directorates/Divisions
will need carefully to assess whether the harm likely
to be caused (e.g., HSE unable to prosecute and
thus, by example, deter others from committing similar
offences) is outweighed by other factors (such as
reducing the risk of similar health and safety failures
by targeting specific information at duty-holders
or raising awareness through a publicity campaign).
Similarly, there may in certain circumstances be
a public interest justification for disclosing information
originally provided by third parties in confidence
- for instance, to counter an immediate and significant
threat to health and safety or to the environment.
This is unlikely to be the case where disclosure
would seriously affect the future supply of information
that we need in order to carry out our functions
effectively, or where it would render HSE liable
in damages for breach of confidence. Legal and/or
policy advice should be sought in cases of difficulty,
via Directorate/Divisional OG contacts.
Back to Index
See
what information you can and can not get from the
HSE
HSE’s
internal guidance to inspectors
This comprises the following:
| • |
Operational
Circulars; |
| • |
Sector
Information Minutes |
|
HSE
Practice: HSE’s practice is to make
all internal guidance available, though certain
sections of the guidance may not be released
Reasons:
The reasons why the HSE releases this information
is that:
| • |
It
is lawful for this information to be provided
- it is not caught by section 28 of the
HASAW Act 1974, since this information is
produced by the HSE itself (rather than
being obtained or given to the HSE). There
is therefore no legal restriction on why
the HSE can not provide the information |
| • |
In
addition, section 3(2) of Part 1 of the
Open government Code requires government
bodies to make available "rules, procedures,
internal guidance to officials, and similar
administrative manuals as will assist better
understanding of departmental action in
dealing with the public" |
The HSE can only decide not to make available
particular guidance or particular parts of the
guidance, if:
| • |
it
falls into one of the exemptions contained
in part 2 of the Open Government Code (click
here to see what these are) and |
| • |
release
would "cause significant harm"
(the test contained in HSE’s Openness
Statement.) |
The two exemptions that are used most frequently
by the HSE to argue that particular sections
of the operational circulars etc should not
be disclosed are that their disclosure:
| • |
"would
harm the frankness and candour of internal
discussion" [exemption 2] |
| • |
"could
prejudice the enforcement or proper administration
of the law, including the prevention, investigation
or detection of crime, or the apprehension
or prosecution of offenders" [exemption
4] |
However,
even if it is the HSE’s view that particular
information falls within one of these exemptions,
HSE’s Openness Statement and GAP 1 makes
it clear that the HSE also have to be of the
view that ‘significant harm’ would
be caused before it can refuse to release information.
CCA Comment: In the CCA’s experience,
the HSE does not use the ‘significant harm’
test when refusing to release parts of internal
guidance.
|
Back to Index
Annonymised statistical information etc
Statistics on levels of reported incidents (deaths,
injuries etc) in different industries and different
parts of the country, levels of investigation, levels
of enforcement notices and prosecution and details of
sentencing.
The HSE has a sophisticated database – known
as 'FOCUS' – that contains a great deal of anonymised
information in relation to each reported incident, whether
it was investigated, and details of any prosecution.
It also contains details of all ‘contacts’
made by the HSE to any duty holder. If you want to find
out about the database, ask the HSE to send you a copy
of the ‘FOCUS Handbook’ which gives details
of all the ‘fields’ of data held in the database.
|
HSE
Practice: HSE makes this available though
depending on the accessibility of the information,
there will be a charge of £25 an hour.
Reason: It is lawful to provide this
information: although information collected
by the HSE under RIDDOR 95 is "relevant
information" which should not be disclosed,
there is an exception for information which
is in a form "calculated to prevent it
from being identified as relating to a particular
person or case", which is what is the case
here.
Statistics of the kind do not fall into the
exceptions of Part 2 of the Open Government
Code, and so can be released
|
Back to Index
Conviction/Notices concerning named companies or duty
holders
Details of (a) health and safety offences committed
by companies, individuals and other duty holders (where
the HSE is the prosecutor) and (b) improvement and prohibition
notices imposed on companies etc by the HSE
|
HSE
Practice: This information is now available
on HSE’s prosecution and notices database.
Click Here to see this.
The conviction database only contains information
on those companies and individuals who have
been convicted – not on defendants
who have been prosecuted and acquitted.
The HSE puts the information onto the prosecution
database, 6 weeks after the conviction –
in case the company appeals against its conviction
or sentence.
The database only goes back to April 1999.
The
Notices database contains information on notices
imposed from April 2001. Click
Here to see this
You can obtain data that goes back to April
1996 if you request directly to the HSE.
|
Back to Index
Details of Deaths/injuries etc reported to the HSE concerning
Particular Named companies or Duty holders
Companies and other duty holders are under a legal
duty to inform the HSE concerning particular incidents:
- deaths of workers and members of the public;
- major injuries;
- over-three day injuries
- dangerous occurrences
- diseases
- gas incidents
To see more on what needs to be reported, click here
|
HSE
practice: The HSE never provides names
of people who have died or been injured
and will only provide (anonymised) details
of incidents reported by a particular
company if, in the view of the HSE disclosure
of the information would:
- serve a health and safety positive safety
purpose, or
- prevent harm to the public, or
- it would allay concern amongst the public
Reasons:
| • |
The
Data Protection Act (the DPA) prevents
the HSE from providing, to the public,
names of any individuals who have
died or been injured. |
| |
The
DPA does not, however, prevent
the HSE from providing details of
those incidents without providing
the names of the individuals involved
(i.e.‘anonymised’). |
| • |
However,
this information is considered to
be ‘relevant information’
- and can lawfully only be disclosed
under certain limited exceptions.
The only exemption that is likely
to apply is if the provision of information
serves the "purpose of any function"
of the HSC/E - which the HSE defines
as:
- serving a health and safety positive
safety purpose, or
- preventing harm to the public, or
- allaying concern amongst the public
|
|
|
Back to Index
Reports
of HSE inspections or investigations
Reports of inspections and investigations undertaken
by the HSE inspectors into companies and other duty
holders
|
HSE
Practice: it appears to be HSE practice
not to provide you with the reports of the inspection
or investigation itself, but to provide you
with summaries of this report. Para 1.77 of
GAP 1 states
‘There
is no right to have a copy of the inspection
or investigation report itself … However,
in most cases factual aspects of a report
– e.g. the premises inspected, the data
of inspection, what was found, any breaches
of health and safety legislation, any action
required and the date by which it is required
…. in particular, care should be taken
not to disclose information on the reasons
inspectors exercised their discretion in a
particular way as the cumulative effect of
such disclosure could adversely affect HSE’s
abilities to carry out its functions."
Reasons:
Information collected by HSE inspectors should
not be released, but the HSE seems to accept
that disclosure of some information from these
reports would "serve the purpose of HSC/E’s
functions" and therefore be disclosable
unless the HSE is of the view that release of
the information came within one of the exceptions
of the Open Government Code and would cause
significant harm.
CCA Comments: GAP 1 states that: "care
should be taken not to disclose information
on the reasons inspectors exercised their discretion
in a particular way as the cumulative effect
of such disclosure could adversely affect HSE’s
abilities to carry out its functions,"
– however the test that should be used
by the HSE is whether significant harm
would be disclosed by the disclosure.
|
Back to Index
Witness
Statements
When HSE undertake investigations into reported
incidents they take statements from witnesses.
HSE
Practice: The HSE is not willing to disclose
witness statements to any member of the public
even if the statements relate to an investigation
concerned with an injury or death and the member
of the public (who wants a copy of the statements)
is either the injured person or a member of the
bereaved family.
The only exception to this is when the witness
who gave the statements consents to their release.
Even when the statements are sought for the purposes
of an inquest, the HSE does not provide the statements.
In fact the HSE writes to coroners informing them
that they should not release any information or
statements which the HSE has provided the coroner
for the purposes of a forthcoming inquest
Reason: a 'witness statement' is information
obtained "as a result of the exercise of"
HSE inspectors powers and so by section 28(7)
can only be disclosed in limited situations which
the HSE does not consider exists.
CCA Comment: HSE’s interpretation
of the exemptions is particularly problematic
when it comes to bereaved families who would like
copies of witness statements prior to an inquest.
It appears to be HSE’s view that inquests:
- are not 'legal proceedings" or;
- do not serve a "positive health and safety
purpose"
and therefore disclosure would not be lawful
If the HSE changed its mind on this point (so
disclosure would not be unlawful) the HSE could
only prevent disclosure of the statements if:
| - |
the
witness would not consent to the disclosure.
and; |
| - |
it
could show that disclosure both fell into
one of the exemptions of Part 2 of the Open
Government Code, and would cause significant
harm. |
It is possible, for example, that the HSE may
be of the view that disclosure of the statement
"would prejudice law enforcement and legal
proceedings" [Exemption 4] if, for example,
the HSE was still considering prosecution.
However, even then, the HSE must be of the view
that disclosure of the statement would cause 'significant
harm'. Click here to see how
the HSE interprets significant harm.
To read more on HSE's policy on not allowing
coroners to disclose statements to bereaved families
prior to an inquest. Click
Here
|
Back to Index
Reasons
for Decisions not to prosecute companies or directors
Bereaved families or injured workers are often interested
in why the HSE has made a decision not to prosecute
a company/director or if it has decided to prosecute
a company, why no individual manager or director.
HSE Practice: In deciding whether or not to
prosecute the HSE should consider (a) the tests set
out in the Crown Prosecution Service’s Code of
Crown Prosecutors and (b) the criteria set out in
HSE’s own Enforcement Policy Statement.
In effect the HSE, the HSE must decide whether there
is sufficient evidence to prosecute and if there is,
whether the criteria set out in paras 39-41 of the
Enforcement Policy Statement apply (to see these click
here).
It is the HSE practice to give families or injured
workers very limited information as to why the HSE
have decided not to prosecute. Sometimes, the HSE
simply says there was ‘insufficient evidence’
to prosecute, and nothing else.
The practice is very different from the way the CPS
deals with bereaved families where detailed reasons
are provided.
HSE Reasons: The HSE gives different reasons
for why disclosure is not possible. A decision not
to prosecute is based on evidence collected by HSE
inspectors. This is information that cannot be disclosed
unless it serves the purposes of the function of the
HSE – and the HSE does not consider providing
details of reasons not to prosecute (even to bereaved
families) serves HSE’s purposes.…..
Back to Index
Appealing decisions of the
HSE not to release information
You can appeal against a decision by the HSE not to
provide you information.
The HSE will set up a Panel that will normally consist
of a member of the HSE’s three person executive
Board, another senior HSE official and an independent
members from outside HSE.
GAP 1 says that:
"as far as possible none of the members of
the panel will have been connected with the original
decision to refuse to supply all or part of the
information requested, or with the assessment of
the charges. HSE’s Open Government Branch [now
known as ….] will provide the Secretariat for
the panel will coordinate the handling of the complaint."
Appendix
G to GAP 1 gives further information on procedure
of this panel. To see this, click
here.
If you are still dissatisfied with the Panel’s
decision, you can make a complaint to the ombudsman.
Click Here for
information on how to do this.
Back to Index
How
to obtain the information
If you are a bereaved relative, or an injured worker
you should first seek the information from the inspector
undertaking the investigation into the death or injury.
If the information you are seeking does not relate
to a particular investigation or inspection, we would
suggest that you write to:
Keith
Pritchard,
External Engagement Branch,
Health and Safety Executive
Rose Court,
2 Southwark Bridge,
London SE1
or
e-mail him, by clicking
here
Back
to Index
HSC's
Enforcement Policy Statement (Excerpt)
| 39 |
Subject
to the above, HSC expects that, in the public
interest, enforcing authorities should normally
prosecute, or recommend prosecution, where, following
an investigation or other regulatory contact,
one or more of the following circumstances apply.
Where:
| • |
death
was a result of a breach of the legislation;4 |
| • |
the
gravity of an alleged offence, taken together
with the seriousness of any actual or potential
harm, or the general record and approach
of the offender warrants it; |
| • |
there
has been reckless disregard of health and
safety requirements |
| • |
there have been repeated breaches which
give rise to significant risk, or persistent
and significant poor compliance; |
| • |
work
has been carried out without or in serious
non-compliance with an appropriate licence
or safety case; |
| • |
a
duty holder’s standard of managing
health and safety is found to be far below
what is required by health and safety law
and to be giving rise to significant risk; |
| • |
there
has been a failure to comply with an improvement
or prohibition notice; or there has been
a repetition of a breach that was subject
to a formal caution; |
| • |
false
information has been supplied wilfully,
or there has been an intent to deceive,
in relation to a matter which gives rise
to significant risk; |
| • |
inspectors
have been intentionally obstructed in the
lawful course of their duties. |
Where inspectors are assaulted, enforcing authorities
will seek police assistance, with a view to seeking
the prosecution of offenders.
|
| 40 |
HSC
also expects that, in the public interest, enforcing
authorities will consider prosecution, or consider
recommending prosecution, where following an investigation
or other regulatory contact, one or more of the
following circumstances apply:
| • |
it
is appropriate in the circumstances as a
way to draw general attention to the need
for compliance with the law and the maintenance
of standards required by law, and conviction
may deter others from similar failures to
comply with the law; |
| • |
a
breach which gives rise to significant risk
has continued despite relevant warnings
from employees, or their representatives,
or from others affected by a work activity.
Prosecution of individuals |
|
| 41 |
Subject
to the above, enforcing authorities should identify
and prosecute or recommend prosecution of individuals
if they consider that a prosecution is warranted.
In particular, they should consider the management
chain and the role played by individual directors
and managers, and should take action against them
where the inspection or investigation reveals
that the offence was committed with their consent
or connivance or to have been attributable to
neglect on their part and where it would be appropriate
to do so in accordance with this policy. Where
appropriate, enforcing authorities should seek
disqualification of directors under the Company
Directors Disqualification Act 1986. |
| |
4 Health and safety sentencing guidelines regard
death resulting from a criminal act as an aggravating
feature of the offence. If there is sufficient
evidence, HSC considers that normally such cases
should be brought before the court. However, there
will be occasions where the public interest does
not require a prosecution, depending on the nature
of the breach and the surrounding circumstances
of the death. Back |
Back
To download the whole Enforcement Policy Statement,
Click Here
(PDF)
Annex G to GAP 1
HSE - INTERNAL COMPLAINTS PANEL
NOTES ON PROCEDURE - ROLE OF THE OPEN GOVERNMENT BRANCH
| 1.G9 |
Unless the Director General personally decides
that a complaint is well founded or that it should
be dealt with otherwise, the complaint will be
submitted to the Panel described in paragraph
10 below. |
| 1.G10 |
The
Panel will consist of a member of the Executive
(who will act as Chairman of the panel), another
senior (or recently retired) officer of the Executive
(normally a Board member), and a third person
from outside the Executive, usually a representative
of business and industry. These arrangements will
continue until the Executive agrees otherwise.
The membership of the Panel itself may change
from time to time. |
| 1.G11 |
An
official will be appointed to act as secretary
to the Panel; until further notice this will be
an official from HSE’s Strategy Division
Open Government Branch (see Appendix). |
| 1.G12 |
The
secretary will provide the Panel members with
the complaint itself, an indication of issues
the Panel is being invited to address and any
necessary background material. |
| 1.G13 |
The Chairman may wish to invite the Panel to meet
during the complaint process in order to discuss
the issues involved and to agree any final conclusions.
The members of the Panel will consider the complaint
and may request additional information. |
| 1.G14 |
If
the Panel is convened, the secretary makes a note
of the discussion and of any conclusions/decisions
reached and will communicate these to the Director
General. |
| 1.G15 |
In the event of a disagreement, the Chairman will
seek to bring the Panel to unanimity. In the event
of a minority view on the Panel, that view and
the reasons for it will also be communicated to
the Director General. |
| 1.G16 |
The Director General will communicate to the complainant:
a the recommendations of the Panel and its reasons;
b the Director General’s decision in light
of the Panel’s recommendations and reasons. |
| 1.G17 |
HSE will endeavor to reach a decision on a complaint
within 6 weeks of the date of its receipt by the
Director General. Should longer time be necessary,
the secretary will advise the complainant accordingly. |
Appendix
|
| 1.G18 |
The
Open Government Branch (OGB) will provide staff
to act as the secretariat to the complaint panel. |
| 1.G19 |
The
secretariat will invite suitable officials/external
candidates to make up the three members of the
panel. |
| 1.G20 |
The
secretariat will liaise with other HSE Directorates
and Divisions relevant to the complaint and will
invite them to submit documents and copies of
all relevant correspondence that have a bearing
on the complaint. OGB will use these documents
to prepare a Definition of Issues for the Panel.
This will provide a full background to the complaint
as well as indicating the issues the Panel is
being invited to address. |
| 1.G21 |
The
secretary will write formally to Panel members,
confirming receipt of the complaint and confirming
arrangements for the panel. |
| 1.G22 |
The
secretary will takes notes/minutes at any Panel
meetings as appropriate and provide general administrative
support to the Chairman and Panel members as required. |
| 1.G23 |
The
secretary will draft a note for clearance by the
Chairman and any final recommendations/decision
for the panel Chairman for forwarding to the Director
General. |
Back to Section on Appeal
|
