Railways and Transport Safety Bill

[back to previous text]

New clause 18

Coordination between Health and Safety Executive and the Office of Rail Regulation

    'The Memorandum of Understanding between the Health and Safety Executive and the Office of Rail Regulation shall be replaced by a new memorandum, the purpose of which is to promote effective coordination of the regulatory orders of each body and cooperation between them.'.—[Miss McIntosh.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Miss McIntosh: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Column Number: 147

I am grateful for the opportunity to move this new clause. The Minister and the Under-Secretary have both referred to the aviation accident investigation branch as the model organisation for accident investigation. I understand that work done in Farnborough often proves the key to swift investigation of aviation accidents. I personally become confused when I hear talk about the protocol, and the hon. Member for Bath spoke about a memorandum of understanding.

The railway industry raised various concerns about the Bill. It welcomed what the Bill was designed to achieve. It has seen for itself the work of the aviation accident investigation branch, and in particular the protocols and memorandum of understanding to which it works. My understanding is that they are tight documents. By comparison, the protocols and memorandum of understanding relating to the rail industry are voluminous and include several annexes. It is my wish that we should use as the model for the documents that flow from this legislation the protocols and memorandum of understanding drafted by the aviation accident investigation branch. I wonder whether the Minister has given any thought to that.

I understand that there is currently a memorandum of understanding—probably a hefty document—between the Health and Safety Executive and the Office of Rail Regulation, and I am sure that the Minister will confirm that there are memorandums of understanding or protocols between the Strategic Rail Authority and the HSE.

Mr. Foster: Lest the hon. Lady should mislead the Committee, it is hardly a voluminous document. It is three and a half pages long. I have a copy here.

Miss McIntosh: I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for clarifying that. Representatives of the industry gave me the impression that many of the protocols were lengthy, certainly in comparison with the protocol of the AAIB, which probably does not even run to three pages and uses a bigger font.

There is a memorandum of understanding between the Health and Safety Executive and the Office of Rail Regulation or, as it stands at the moment, the rail regulator. I think the Minister said that that would stay in place until April 2004. The new clause gives us the opportunity to consider the relationship, as set out in the memorandum of understanding, between the HSE and the new Office of Rail Regulation, and also—the Select Committee made a plea for this—to examine the scope of the relationship between the Strategic Rail Authority and the Office of Rail Regulation. As the hon. Member for Bath mentioned, that will be a difficult issue. I am sure that when we consider part 3 of the Bill, we will discuss the relationship between the rail accident investigation branch and the police.

There is some merit and strength in the argument that the rail accident investigation branch, as is the case with the aviation and marine accident investigation branches, will be first on the scene and will have a clear right to inspect and to take statements, so it would be helpful to set out what that relationship will be in a memorandum of

Column Number: 148

understanding at the earliest possible stage. We all agree that the priority should be for a swift and comprehensive investigation in every case. It is clearly understood that any statement given to the aviation accident investigation branch will, in no circumstances, be made available to anyone else, even if the person who made the statement wishes its contents to be made available at a later date. The reasons for that were set out by the Secretary of State and supported by my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale on Second Reading, so there is no argument there. The purpose is to ensure a speedy investigation, which reaches a swift conclusion and goes to the root causes of the accident. That should be shared with the industry at the earliest opportunity.

The memorandum of understanding has not done what we are seeking to do with the Health and Safety Executive and the Office of Rail Regulation, nor has the other memorandum of understanding, or protocols as they are often known. Regrettably, there is a lacuna in our understanding of what will be the status of these statements. My understanding is that in the case of the aviation accident investigation branch, it was clear at the outset that any statement made could not be prejudiced or released to anyone else, but would be dealt with in good faith, and that the lessons to be learned, the root causes and the prevention of similar accidents would immediately be passed on to the entire industry.

10.45 am

Our new clause 18 states:

    ''The Memorandum of Understanding . . . shall be replaced by a new memorandum, the purpose of which is to promote effective coordination of the regulatory orders of each body and cooperation between them.'

This is a useful opportunity not only to suggest that the memorandum of understanding should be replaced, but to determine what a memorandum of understanding should say if the parties to the investigation are to know exactly where they stand and if we are to learn what the status of their statements will be. That applies as much to the marine accident investigation branch as it does to the aviation accident investigation branch.

I admit that I have some difficulty in knowing what the role of the Health and Safety Executive will be following enactment of the Bill. We discussed that at some length on Second Reading. In the interests of clarity, however, it would be helpful to get to grips with these different memorandums and protocols, to look to the models of the two other investigation branches, as we have throughout our consideration, and to state clearly that the memorandums of understanding will run only until, say, April 2004 and will be replaced. We know what the model and the status of evidence given to each of them will be.

We submitted the new clause in the spirit of helpfulness, and I hope that the Government will look generously on it. I do not want to labour the point, but I have some concern about the role of the Health and Safety Executive, and what its relationship will be with the rail accident investigation branch and the Office of Rail Regulation. I am aware of the raft of

Column Number: 149

memorandums or protocols in the railway industry. I know that the industry envies the clarity of the aviation accident investigation branch's memorandum of understanding, and I hope that the Government will look favourably on our new clause.

Mr. Foster: I am sure that the hon. Lady anticipates, rightly, that the Minister will reject her new clause as unnecessary. Nevertheless, it raises a point that we touched on before and, as she rightly says, that we will touch on again. Members of the Committee will know that with all the various bodies operating on our railways, there is potential for confusion about their responsibilities and joint working arrangements. The hon. Lady did not say so, but I am sure that she would agree that it is crucial that the new Office of Rail Regulation is an independent body that should not be fettered by any outside influences. At the same time, its work will inevitably have an impact on the working of other bodies, so there needs to be some arrangement to determine how joint working will happen.

The hon. Lady obviously did not have the opportunity to read the existing memorandum. It is worth reading clause 5 of that memorandum, which clearly sets out the principles of how these documents should operate. It states:

    ''The parties recognise the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between the health and safety responsibilities of HSE and the wider duties of the Rail Regulator. However, they recognise that actions by each party in performance of its duties may on occasion impinge on the other party's performance of its duties, and that therefore a framework of effective working arrangements is necessary to ensure mutual co-operation whenever appropriate. The following paragraphs set out such a framework of mutual co-operation.''

We can see that the document contains nothing particularly riveting or surprising. It says that the rail regulator undertakes to consult, to take account of, to notify, to send copies and so on. Similarly, the HSE undertakes to consult, to provide with timely advice, to notify, to ensure that the regulator is included in all relevant consultations and to inform. That is eminently sensible and straightforward.

I hope that the Minister will say that, with the establishment of the Office of Rail Regulation, a new memorandum of understanding will inevitably need to be drawn up. Much more importantly, the new clause gives him an opportunity to make it clear that, with all the new bodies being established and changes being made—the new arrangements for the British Transport police, the new rail accident investigation branch and the establishment of a board with the Office of Rail Regulation—we will need to keep under fairly constant review the relationships between those bodies.

Although the hon. Member for Vale of York did not highlight it, she raised the unasked question. What precisely will be the role of the HSE, given that the establishment of the Railway Safety and Standards Board is about to be formally announced? Many changes are taking place, and we are considering the working relationships in a wide variety of contexts, whether it be the investigation of an accident, the

Column Number: 150

regulatory framework or the new, dynamic and growing powers, as they appear to be, of the Strategic Rail Authority. The SRA is getting involved even in negotiations about pay and conditions for employees of the train operating companies. Given all those changes, there are changing dynamics in the railway system. I hope that the Minister will tell us how all those relationships will operate, not just about the relationship between the ORR and the HSE.

 
Previous Contents Continue

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries ordering index


©Parliamentary copyright 2003
Prepared 11 February 2003