Day 132 - 07 Jun 95 - Page 28


     
     1
     2   Q.   It may sound obvious but?
     3        A.  Indeed.
     4
     5   Q.   You agree with that?  I have to ask you because it has not
     6        been taken as evidence.
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think that is common ground.
     9
    10   MR. MORRIS:  If we go to page 10, you then talk about the lack
    11        of formal action by EHOs, yes, in your last line there?
    12        A.  I am sorry, what page?
    13
    14   Q.   Page 10.
    15
    16   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  252 in the bundle.
    17
    18   MR. MORRIS:  In the last line you talk about lack of formal
    19        action by EHOs?
    20        A.  Yes.
    21
    22   Q.   We have talked about informal action.
    23        A.  Yes.
    24
    25   Q.   You have just talked about just now, and recommendations
    26        and contacts?
    27        A.  Yes.
    28
    29   Q.   Formal action by EHO, is that quite a time consuming thing,
    30        do they have to prepare a special report?
    31        A.  It is indeed, yes.
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It is time consuming and it can be expensive
    34        especially if you start going to court over matters?
    35        A.  It can be, indeed.  However, that is what they are
    36        there for, I hasten to add.
    37
    38   MR. MORRIS:  But there is a general attitude amongst EHOs is
    39        that you avoid formal action if you can possibly help it?
    40        A.  No.  In fact, I can quote authorities which work in
    41        quite the opposite way, and actively seek prosecution.
    42
    43   Q.   So if McDonald's failure to report 10 or 20, or whatever,
    44        per cent, that is in their own estimate, of RIDDOR
    45        accidents ---
    46        A.  Yes.
    47
    48   Q.   -- illegally failing to report those, the fact of them and
    49        in the time specified, then how come the EHOs are not
    50        picking this up? 
    51        A.  Pass.  Obviously, I cannot comment on that.  If they 
    52        know about it, presumably, they will take action, but they 
    53        may not consider it worthy of prosecution.  I can
    54        understand that.  They may consider it a technical offence
    55        if there is no intention to defraud.
    56
    57   Q.   So when you say "always vigorously scrutinized"?
    58        A.  Yes, absolutely.
    59
    60   Q.   The sector may be, but in terms of any particular

Prev Next Index