Injured workers will be disadvantaged if the
government goes ahead with a plan to end the strict liability of employers for
safety offences, the House of Lords has heard. On 14 November, peers debated
wide-ranging changes included in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill. An amendment inserted by
the government seeks to change safety law to remove the right of individuals to
make civil compensation claims for criminal breaches of statutory health and
safety duties. Claims would be limited to those where negligence could be
established. Labour's Lord Whitty said the employment changes overall fall into
an 'ugly' category. 'Ugliest of the lot are the provisions referred to by the
noble Lord, Lord Low, relating to Clauses 61, which appears to provide that
victims - physical, mental, financial or mortal - of the failure of private or
public corporations to fulfil their statutory responsibilities will, in most
cases, no longer be entitled to compensation.' Labour's former safety minister
Lord McKenzie of Luton said 'if adopted as it stands, this clause will mean
fewer injured employees being able to claim for their injuries, claims will be
more costly to pursue, greater costs will fall on the state and safety
standards for employees will fall.' Unions have also criticised the proposed
change. Unite said the strict liability move 'is the latest of an increasingly
long list of attacks on the rights of innocent victims.'
