I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, for his elucidation. Clearly, we will need to reflect on his comments. As I was explaining, Amendment No. 83 takes another approach to compliance and proposes that the court should be able to require a convicted organisation to report back to it with details of the remedial steps taken. However, it is not clear how such a proposal could work, given that the original court will have risen at the end of the trial. Reconstituting the court to receive such a report would be a new departure for the UK courts, which currently do not monitor sentence compliance in that way. Without expert guidance it would also be very difficult for the court to assess the quality or appropriateness of the remedial action taken, particularly if it was highly technical.
A better approach would be to trust the expert bodies to do their job. The relevant enforcing body will have a strong interest in ensuring that safe practices are adopted in a convicted organisation.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 18 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c287-8GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:50:33 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370653
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370653
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370653