David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. I welcome the Minister to the House. I am glad to say that I understand that she proposes to accept the Bill in principle. It is another good day for the Seanad. It is interesting that we have put through a number of Bills recently. The media showed complete disinterest in any of this material which is very important. I congratulate Senator Mark Daly on finding this legislation. It is a very good thing that Seanad Éireann picks up on the doings and deliberations of the Law Reform Commission. Otherwise its findings would be just left lying on shelves in dusty tomes. It is excellent that we took up this matter. It addresses a situation where corporate bodies and entities have evaded their responsibilities.

There is a short story by James Joyce called A Painful Casein which Mrs. Sinico is killed at Sydney Parade by a train. The last line of it instructive: "It seems nobody was to blame." This was the attitude as far as corporate manslaughter was concerned in this country and will continue to be until the passage of this Bill. It seems nobody is to blame. In other words, they can get away with it.

I remember a series of scaffolding disasters, particularly on building sites, where people were killed, the building companies were fined a couple of thousands pounds but nothing was given to the families. This is one of the provisions I would like to see in the Bill. I would like to see the direction of money. People are fined but the money should go to the widows and orphans to protect and look after them. The area of agriculture was mentioned but almost all the accidents involve a single farmer, farm machinery and children, so where is the corporate entity to be sued? In addition to the responsibility on corporations and such bodies. there is a responsibility on every citizen to take care. We see advertisements on the television every night about people out in countryside or clipping a hedge next of an electrical wire. People have to take responsibility for themselves.

I speak with some passion on this because for quite a number of years I was the manager, owner, and everything else of a gay nightclub in Temple Bar. It actually started the whole of Temple Bar. We had a cinema, restaurant, discotheque, library, outreach facilities, publications and all that kind of thing.We were an amateur, volunteer body. God Almighty could not have stopped people smuggling in bottles of vodka, joints and the like. There was a flat roof and I was always in a taut state of excitement in case some of these people would fall of the roof and we would be liable. Again, they should have had a duty of care. Then considers events such as the Stardust fire, where the fire doors were bolted. That is a clear example of responsibility. Fire exits should always be maintained.

My colleague in Fine Gael said that we could not possibly have the fire brigades and ambulances. Why the hell not? Senator Daly gave the example of the rescue services and the way in which they were deliberately deprived of life-saving instruments and material. I believe that if the fire brigade is grossly negligent, it should be done for that in the same way as everybody else. It has a responsibility. As the individual fire fighters and so forth give their efforts and risk their lives on behalf of all of us, that means we also have a duty to protect them legislatively, so I apologise for not accepting that argument. It should be liable just as much.

I noted the way the Bill is sensitively worded. It says that the standard of care required of the undertaking is to take all reasonable measures, having due regard to the state and circumstances of the undertaking. In other words, it must be proportionate. This is a very good thing in legislation. I am not entirely sure of the difference between corporate manslaughter and grossly negligent management causing death. They appear to be pretty much the same. I like the idea of pre-sanction reports. Before one goes in with the hatchet one finds out what the situation in the company is. There is absolutely no point in fining a company or an individual €5 million if they are virtually bust. A pre-sanction report should include information on the means and financial status of the undertaking, which is very important, and the previous compliance, in other words whether it had a good record. This is evidence relating to the character of the company. The report should also include the previous co-operation by the undertaking with relevant bodies having legislative enforcement functions and the possible adverse effects on other parties of imposing a fine or other measures under the legislation. It is a carefully constructed provision.

I support the idea of community service orders. They are much better if it is an individual, if it is a fairly small situation and if there are extenuating circumstances. It is good to have provision for community service orders in the legislation. I love the idea of adverse publicity orders, where the company must state in public, "We were wrong. We were responsible for this death and we are very sorry. We will never do it again and we warn other companies to take precautions". That is very good, because it might well prevent incidents further down the line. My final point is about the €5 million fine. I do not know anybody who could support such a fine. Nobody of my acquaintance could and I certainly could not. However, it is probably wise to make provision for the most extreme circumstance.

This is a very good Bill. Hello, media, I think this is another good day for the Seanad. We are showing that we are worth our weight in gold. Nobody is listening, but the Seanad is a damned good institution and it does valiant work protecting the lives, safety and welfare of the people of Ireland.