HL Deb 29 April 1948 vol 155 cc555-68

4.6 p.m.

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

LORD HENDERSON

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. The primary purpose of the Bill is to secure protection for the health of workpeople and the public generally against the harmful effects from undue exposure to dangerous radiation. We are dealing in the Bill with radiation both from natural radioactive substances—radium, radon, and other natural elements and a whole range of artificially produced substances—and from certain types of apparatus of which X-ray apparatus is the most widely known. It will be recalled that a Bill for this purpose was introduced into your Lordships' House about a year ago. Discussions which followed the introduction of that Bill showed that it was capable of improvement in a good many respects, and we decided, therefore, not to proceed with it last Session. Those improvements have now been effected, and I hope that the present Bill which embodies them will secure a substantial measure of agreement.

Your Lordships will be aware of the many uses of radiations of the kind I have mentioned, and the wide fields with which this Bill is concerned. Radioactive substances are used in industry as luminising agents—many of your Lordships are, no doubt, carrying about with you radioactive substances in the form of luminous watches—and they are also used in the manufacture of many other products. Radium and radon are used in medicine in the treatment of certain forms of cancer. Powerful X-ray tubes are used for a similar purpose and also for many industrial purposes—for example, for the testing of castings. Natural radioactive substances are already widely used in scientific research; and the artificial radio elements which will shortly become available will be of immense importance as research tools and for therapeutic purposes. These substances and apparatus are dangerous. The possibilities of injury to health, if they are handled without the most stringent precautions or by people who are not fully aware of the risks, range from minor burns and other ill-effects to the most serious illness, disability and death. There is reason to suppose, too, that undue exposure to radiation may have genetic effects which are, as yet, uncertain. These are not new dangers. They have existed ever since, some fifty years ago, we began to use radioactive substances and apparatus and to discover their possibilities.

It is true that a great deal has been achieved by the British X-ray and Radium Protection Committee, appointed over twenty-five years ago by the Medical Research Council, but the recommendations of this Committee, valuable as they have been, are and remain recommendations only, and their advice has not, I am afraid, always been asked for or taken. Despite the Committee's work, accidents have happened—almost certainly more accidents than we know, for the dangers are insidious and the effects often do not become apparent until years after the cause. Moreover, recent developments in nuclear physics and electrical engineering have created a new situation. Artificial radioactive substances will soon be available in considerable quantities. X-ray apparatus of much greater power—and therefore proportionately more dangerous—is being developed, and the use of such apparatus, both in medicine and industry, has for some time been steadily increasing. To the X-ray tube has been added the cyclotron, the betatron, and the synchrotron—all capable of emitting very powerful radiations. Though potent tools in the hands of the scientist and the doctor, these new substances and apparatus have added greatly to the need for protection. The new situation calls for new measures, and my right honourable friend the Minister of Health is strongly advised by experts in this field that the provisions of this Bill are essential if all these developments are not to be attended by danger as well as benefit. We must be able to protect the worker who is in contact with these substances or apparatus in industry, in hospitals or elsewhere; the patient who runs the risk of unskilled treatment; and the public at large.

Your Lordships will not have failed to observe that the Bill is, to a great extent, an enabling measure. It puts—I will admit it freely—wide powers into the hands of the Ministers, since the substances and apparatus concerned, and the elaboration of the methods of protection required, are alike left to be laid down in regulations. We propose this for two wholly practical reasons. The first is that it is a difficult and complicated technical matter to draw the line between dangerous and harmless amounts of radiation, and the line may vary for different substances and different purposes. We must be able, as regulations will, in fact, make possible, to frame appropriate definitions and apply them on expert advice for the different fields we have to cover. Secondly, the method of proceeding by way of regulation will make for ease of amendment to meet changing circumstances, a precaution which, I am sure your Lordships will agree, is entirely necessary in a field in which new discoveries are being made almost daily.

If there is to be a wide use of the regulation method of procedure, safeguards are clearly needed. I will, therefore, at this point, draw your Lordships' attention to the stringent safeguards embodied in Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill and designed to ensure that any controls proposed are fully considered both by expert opinion and by the public before they are adopted. Clause 6 requires the Ministers principally concerned to appoint an advisory committee, whose duty is to be to advise them on any matters concerned with the exercise of their functions under the Bill which the Committee itself thinks fit to raise and, of course, on questions referred to it by the Ministers. The Committee is to be appointed after consultation with the appropriate scientific professional and technical organisations, which will certainly include the Medical Research Council, the Royal Soceity, the Physical Society, the three Royal Medical Colleges and the three Royal Medical Corporations in Scotland, the Faculty of Radiologists, the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, and the British X-Ray and Radium Protection Committee. I can give your Lordships the assurance that the Ministers concerned intend to appoint to the Committee persons of the highest eminence in the different subjects on which advice will be needed, and to ensure a proper balance between the medical, scientific, and other interests affected.

One of the advisory committee's most important functions will be to advise on the framing of regulations under the Bill since, in each case, the Minister concerned is required by the Bill itself to consult the committee before making his regulations. In this way, the closest expert scrutiny will be applied to the exercise of the powers of control given by the Bill, and no measures will be adopted which do not commend themselves to those best: qualified to judge. Two further safeguards against the imposition of unnecessary or excessive restrictions are contained in Clause 9, which requires that all regulations shall be published in draft and objections heard—if necessary, at a public inquiry—before they are finally made. When made, the regulations have to be laid before Parliament, and are thus subject to a third examination. I am sure that noble Lords will agree that this public review, following upon expert advice, amply ensures that there will be no ill-considered or hasty control which the public interest does not justify.

May I now turn in rather more detail to the actual forms of control we propose in the Bill? To begin with, the Bill proposes in Clause 3 to prohibit the sale or supply to the public of medicines or toilet preparations containing more than a prescribed quantity of radioactive material, except by a doctor or dentist holding a licence for the purpose from one of the Health Ministers, or by a chemist under the authority of a prescription from a licensed doctor or dentist. We are aiming here primarily at preventing the indiscriminate sale to the public of a wide range of manufactured products—radioactive water, soap, face cream, bath salts and things of that kind—which are at present readily available and which, if they really are radioactive, may do definite injury to those who use them.

Clause 3 also limits the administration of radioactive substances by way of treatment of human beings to licensed doctors and dentists. We put forward this proposal because we are advised that the dangers inherent in the use of many of these new substances, and the method by which they may safely be used in treatment, are not by any means universally known, even among members of the medical profession. And the dangers are serious. Similarly, the Bill, in Clause 4, requires anyone using irradiating apparatus emitting radiation (of a strength to be defined in regulations) for medical or dental treatment, to obtain a licence from the appropriate Health Minister. Here again we know of many unfortunate accidents which we intend to prevent in future. I should add that the clause provides for the extension of this licensing power to cover the use of irradiating apparatus for diagnostic purposes, if that course should be found to be desirable in the light of the advice of the expert advisory committee.

Before I leave the licensing system, there are one or two points which I should like to mention. Both Clause 3 and Clause 4 empower the Health Ministers to make orders exempting specified classes of persons from the requirement to obtain a licence, and both clauses require the making of any such order to be dependent on consultation with the advisory committee. The committee will also advise on the general principles on which licences are granted—the appropriate qualifications, experience, and so on—and on any conditions to be attached to the grant of licences.

Clause 5 of the Bill empowers the appropriate Ministers to lay down by regulation codes of safety precautions for the protection of the public and workers in premises where radioactive substances and irradiating apparatus are used. The Factories Act already empowers the Minister of Labour to make regulations to safeguard the health of workers in factories. Your Lordships will be aware that regulations relating to factories in which luminising is carried on are already in force and have been found most useful. But the Factories Act does not apply to all industrial premises or to the transport of dangerous substances, and there are other establishments for which we think that safety precautions should be prescribed—hospitals, for example, and laboratories. These premises—and the clause covers transport as well—are the concern of a number of different Ministers. The clause therefore empowers the appropriate Minister, who is in each case to be designated by Order in Council, to make such provision as appears to him to be necessary to prevent injury being caused to the health of persons employed at those premises or places, or other persons. Here again, there must be prior consultation with the advisory committee.

In addition, the appropriate Minister is empowered by regulation to ensure that radioactive waste products from factories and so on are disposed of safely. Discharges from premises where radioactive substances are handled—smoke, dust, liquid effluent—may be contaminated with radioactive material and may be dangerous to people living in the neighbourhood and to animals and water supplies. The kind of requirement we have in mind is that chimneys should be heightened to ensure that dangerous smokes are dissipated, that the rate and temperature at which liquid effluent is discharged are regulated, and that contaminated articles of clothing or equipment are disposed of safely.

These are the outlines of the forms of control we propose in the Bill. There are two further matters I should mention. First, Clause 1 empowers the Minister of Supply to manufacture, process and distribute radioactive substances. This provision will enable the Minister to dispose of the radioactve by-products from atomic energy piles as well as natural radium and radon, and we hope by this means to improve the supply of radioactive substances of all kinds for the purposes of medicine, research and industry. Secondly, the Minister of Supply is given power by Clause 2 to control the import and export of radioactive substances. This control is at present effected under the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defence) Act, 1939; but that is a temporary measure, and under Clause 2 the Minister of Supply will be able to keep the control in being when that Act expires.

It will, I think, be clear from what I have said that this is both an important and an urgent measure. The means we propose to adopt for safeguarding health may appear drastic, but I cannot emphasise too strongly our intention to avoid the least unnecessary interference with science, medicine or industry. I hope your Lordships will agree that the Bill gives us sufficient power to attain our objects and, at the same time, guards adequately against the possibility of any unreasonable use of that power. I am hopeful, therefore, that the Bill will be regarded as non-controversial, and I trust that it will have a speedy passage through your Lordships' House. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Henderson.)

4.23 p.m.

LORD CHERWELL

My Lords, I can well understand the Labour Party being very much interested in radioactivity. As your Lordships know, the primary phenomenon in radioactivity is that occasionally from time to time a small particle is ejected from the nucleus. This leaves the nucleus in an excited state, which may or may not result in further ejections, until it settles down again into a stable condition. In the early days of X-rays, of course, before the danger of this form of radiation was realised, there were some lamentable incidents and some occasions on which severe injury was suffered by people using X-rays. But for the last twenty-five years or so there have been scarcely no cases of severe injury. When one compares the relative safety of this form of work and experi- ment with, for instance, the number of deaths on the road, one feels that perhaps on this occasion we are taking somewhat unnecessary trouble about a very slight danger. On the other hand, we are producing a number of new radioactive substances, and as some of us have seen in the newspapers, there have been some quite ridiculous scares about the terrible results which have been, produced, usually in factories which had not started working. For instance, it was claimed that impotence had been produced, of which there is at present no evidence whatever, in any circumstances. On he other hand, of course, sterilisation is one of the early results of undue exposure. In all the circumstances, I think we shall agree that the introduction and carrying into law of some measure of this sort is probably justified. It is not only necessary that the public should be safeguarded against these dangers, but that they should seem to be safeguarded. In view of these scares especially, it is worth while making certain that everybody realises that the matter has not been overlooked.

I am very glad that the Bill which was introduced some time ago has now been replaced by this new measure. The old Bill was calculated to hamstring research altogether in many ways. It is quite impossible to prevent people working in laboratories from committing suicide if they want to. One cannot possibly make certain that nobody can get hold of high tension terminals or that they cannot obtain a poison or that they cannot expose themselves to some form to danger. In every reasonable physical laboratory where these sort of radiations are used, anybody liable to come into the neighbourhood of the substance that is radiating, or of the machines producing the radiation carries a recording device which tells him exactly the amount of radiation to which he is being exposed, so that in case of danger the man can be safeguarded and the source of danger removed. Under the old Bill nobody was allowed to treat, use, import or possess any radioactive substance. As your Lordships know, it is almost impossible to produce anything that does not contain some of these radio-active substances. A ton of any material contains something like a microgram of radioactive material: This table, that glass of water—everything contains radioactive substances. Therefore, in the form in which it was drafted, the old Bill was really unworkable.

The new Bill is a great improvement. According to the new Bill the Minister may prohibit—it does not say that he must prohibit—anyone from importing or exporting radioactive substances and it says that he can prescribe the quantity of radioactive element to which the prohibition applies. Presumably, on the advice of his committee he will prescribe a reasonable quantity, and will not say as was said in the old Bill: "No radioactive material whatsoever." Then the Bill lays down that nobody, unless he has a licence, is to administer any of these radioactive substances to human beings. There again, presumably, the Minister will act on the advice of the committee; otherwise, some innocuous salt like potassium bromide, which is a perfectly harmless substance, would be barred simply on the basis that potassium is radioactive. I take it that when the Bill says in Clause 3 (2): …no person shall administer any such substance, it means: "any such substance containing more than the prescribed quantity." Frankly, I was a little surprised to see subsection (5) (e). In previous clauses it is laid down that nobody except an expert, or someone who knows what he is using it for, may possess any of this material, or have it, or buy it. Yet I find that any Minister of the Crown is allowed to have it. As I have said, one of its first effects in excess is to cause sterilisation. I do not know whether the Minister of Health's dislike of the hereditary principle is coming into the open here, but I think it is a little hard that he should put it to the test on his own colleagues.

We then come to the question of the irradiating apparatus. There again there is no definition given of "irradiating apparatus." I imagine that this, too, will have to be decided on the advice of the committee; otherwise, anyone who advised someone else to sit in front of an electric fire to cure his rheumatism, or to alleviate it, might be liable under the Act. I confess that subsection (5) gave us a little anxiety, because it seemed at first to open the way to all sorts of interference. There again, I look to safeguarding by the advisory committee. As to the waste products, of course it is necessary to take precautions, but I think the danger may easily be exaggerated. For instance, I have seen grave doubts raised about small quantities being put into the Thames, although they should not make the waters there nearly as radioactive as those of Bath or Gastein, which are always considered as health resorts, and where radioactive water is paraded as being one of their great virtues. As I have said, everything hinges upon the advisory committee. If it is sensible all will be well, but if it contains a lot of fussy, pernickety people, then I think we may have a lot of trouble. I hope, therefore, that the Minister will make sure that the committee contains a number of users—by users I have in mind industrial people who use these substances, as well as scientific people in laboratories—and that it is not over-weighted entirely with medical watch-dogs, whose intentions are the very best but who like to be on the safe side, and who could, by imposing excessive precautions, probably do a great deal more harm than good.

I need hardly say that we scientists are particularly anxious to be well represented, having recently been told by the Chief Commissioner of the Civil Service that we are uneducated human beings who never lift our vision to the wider horizons. We feel a certain anxiety lest we be over-weighted by a number of civil servants, picked for their personality and bursting with the desire to prove how easily they can put their views across against a humble and, perhaps, unnecessary scientist. But I believe we shall be able to discuss that on a future occasion. There is one further point and it arises in regard to Clause 7 (2) (b). Very properly, penalties are to be inflicted upon anyone who, having discovered industrial secrets in the course of his inspection, discloses them improperly. The threatened penalty is a very small one compared with the penalties for this offence in other Bills of a similar nature. I do not, for a moment, wish to say that the penalties for any ordinary breach of the regulations in this Bill should be increased, but for this particular offence I think it might be advisable if ways could be found to increase the penalty, so as to make it really not worth anyone's while to go in and find out about secret processes and then give them away.

As the noble Lord said, my friends and I attach the greatest importance to the various safeguards which have now been provided: the fact that notice must be given to interested parties before regulations are made; that objections will be heard and, if necessary, a public inquiry will be held, and finally, that if the worst comes to the worst the regulation is subject to annulment by Resolution of either House. The only other point—which is not really very substantial—is with regard to some of the definitions in Clause 12. We read, for instance, that "substance "can mean" any natural or artificial substance."That seems to be a somewhat circular definition, as philosophers would call it. We read also that" a radioactive substance "means" any substance which contains any radioactive chemical element." Again, that includes practically everything, and especially it would contain substances like potassium and rubidium which are practically harmless and are in common use. I am informed that these definitions are not to be taken in the scientific sense, but that the legal people think they are of use and importance.

As I have said, I believe that on the whole it is a good thing to have a Bill of this sort, and I think it is drafted probably as well as it can be. Normally, I strongly dislike government by regulation which is not laid down in a Statute, but here, as the Minister said, things alter so quickly and inventions and discoveries change so rapidly that it is difficult to lay down anything in legal terminology which would hold water if it were exposed to expert criticism. It seems to me that the best way to proceed is like this—to get a good, reasonable, common-sense advisory committee; and I trust that reasonable interpretation of the Bill will make it a workable measure.

4.36 p.m.

LORD AMULREE

My Lords, I would like to say a few words in giving this Bill a warm welcome. I think it will go a long way towards overcoming a series of dangers which at present exist. The precautions which are taken to ensure that any regulations which may be made will not hamper medical work, or, as the noble Lord, Lord Cherwell, said, scientific work, will be satisfactory if they are administered in a reasonable way. One point about this Bill which I did not very much like when I first saw it is that this is the first time that any form of control in regard to any treatment has been placed upon any members of the medical profession. Up to the present, if one had a medical qualification one could carry out any kind of medical work one wished. It will now, for the first time, be necessary for a doctor to obtain a special permit before he can carry out certain forms of treatment. Personally, I do not like that requirement very much and I hope it will not become a regular practice. In this particular case, I think that the danger to patients from the use of radium and X-rays by medical practitioners who have not been well trained and experienced in their use, are very great. I have myself seen a number of really catastrophic instances where people have been severely damaged by radiation. That being so, I am glad to see that some form of control has been put upon the general use of these materials.

The same remark applies to people who possess such materials. In the past it has been possible for people to acquire small quantities of radium from commercial firms. I think that is a practice which has never been very satisfactory and I am pleased to see it is not going to be encouraged by this new Bill. I am not very clear in regard to one point in Clause 3 (5) (d). I am probably being unduly apprehensive about it, but that paragraph says that a person carrying on a hospital, clinic or nursing home may possess radioactive substances. Under other provisions of that clause nobody may make use of those things unless he is licensed. I am wondering whether sufficient care will be taken to ensure that matrons cannot acquire radium, or other radioactive substances and keep them in such a way that proper protection is not afforded. I would like to raise that one point in passing.

I am pleased to see that various safeguards are to be provided in hospitals, factories, and so on, where radioactive substances are used. Just before I came to your Lordships' House I was reading an article in an American paper, The Radiological Journal, which shows how danger can come from scattered radiation, not by the direct beam of an X-ray tube but from the scattered beam. Six men stood in a room in which there was an X-ray tube. They were not there for two minutes before they were badly burned. I think it is very important that proper care should be taken to protect workers, both in hospitals, factories and, so far as can be, laboratories, provided that not too much difficulty is created in carrying out the work. It would be very valuable, if it were possible, to control more buildings where radioactive substances are used, which do not come under the Factories Act, because we are dealing with a poison which, improperly applied, can be worse than, or at any rate as dangerous as, any other poison. One of the dangers is that the effects of this poison may not appear in the patient for a considerable time afterwards. Having made those points, I have very great pleasure in welcoming the Bill.

4.42 p.m.

LORD HENDERSON

My Lords, I am grateful to you for the friendly way in which this Bill has been received this afternoon. I think the discussion on Second Reading has made my task of answering the debate an easy one. There are only one or two points which call for observations from me, and I will confine myself to those points and deal with them briefly. The noble Lord, Lord Cherwell, asked whether there would be any industrial representatives on the advisory committee. I indicated that there would be consultation with various bodies, which I named, before the committee was appointed. Naturally, I am not in a position to anticipate what will be the ultimate composition of this committee, but I can assure the noble Lord that the physicists will have proper representation. Whether there will be industrial representatives of the nature that I understood the noble Lord to mean, I am not at this moment able to say; but I will certainly take back his views and see that they are considered by the Minister before we reach the Committee stage. I would only remind the noble Lord that what I said in my opening speech was that the Ministers would seek balanced representation among the various interests affected.

As regards the controls of the use of irradiating apparatus for therapeutic purposes, the noble Lord was right in his assumption; the advisory committee will be consulted about the regulations prescribing the classes and the descriptions of the types of apparatus referred to in the Bill. The noble Lord also had some doubts about the penalties provided in Clause 8 (2) in respect of an offence of disclosure of information relating to special processes and trade secrets. He thought that, while the penalties are adequate for other offences provided for in the Bill, in this case, perhaps, the penalties are not sufficient, because it is possible to commit an offence and, if there is only a small penalty, still to make a substantial profit. I am impressed by that, and I will call the attention of the Minister to the views which the noble Lord has expressed. Perhaps we can have further thoughts on the matter before we come to the Committee stage.

The noble Lord, Lord Amulree, was not quite sure whether hospitals, nursing homes, and so forth, which are entitled under Clause 3 (5) (d) to hold these radioactive substances, would be subject to proper protective regulations. I think there can be no doubt that it will be well within the province of the advisory committee to make recommendations to the Minister as to the conditions in which such stocks should be held. I hope that by this explanation I have removed whatever doubts the noble Lord had in his mind. I would again thank your Lordships for the friendly reception which has been accorded to the Bill.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.