NEW CLAUSE.—(Special provisions as to functions of Poor Law authorities in respect of infant life protection and vaccination.) (Hansard, 30 January 1929)

§ Sir K. WOOD

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

This new Clause is to make special provision for the functions of Poor Law authorities in regard to infant life protection and vaccination. I do not think the Committee will object to adopting the Clause, which is necessary in order to ensure that the functions in regard to infant life protection and vaccination are imposed upon the appropriate authorities and exercised by the appropriate committees of those authorities. These functions are at present discharged by boards of guardians under Part I of the Children Act, 1908, and the Vaccination Act, respectively. In the absence of any special provisions, both these functions would be transferred to county and county borough councils on the appointed day and administered by the Public Assistance Committees. Therefore, as regards infant life protection it is proposed that the exercise of this function in all cases should be undertaken by the maternity and child welfare authorities. It is thought that 1059 it would be more satisfactory to give the work to those authorities who employ health visitors, the bulk of whose work relates to children under five years of age. As regards London, it is not necessary to make any special provision, since the London County Council and the City Corporation are already authorities under Part I of the Children Act, 1908. In Clause 52 of the Bill it will be found that there is power given to the London County Council to transfer their functions to the metropolitan borough councils, subject to the making of the necessary application to the Minister.

As regards vaccination, the duties of boards of guardians under the Vaccination Act are in the nature of public health functions, and have nothing whatever to do with the relief of the poor. The effect of paragraph (b) of the new Clause will be to secure that the functions relating to vaccination shall be discharged by the county and county borough councils as public health functions, and all matters relating thereto are referred to their health committees, instead of to the public assistance committee. Special provision for vaccination work in London is contained in Clause 15 (f), which provides that this work shall be transferred from the boards of guardians to the common council of the City of London and to the councils of the metropolitan borough councils, instead of to the London County Council. This provision is in accordance with the wishes of the county council and the borough councils. I think the Committee will agree that the proposals in the Clause constitute the best allocation of this work that could be devised, and give a guarantee for the efficiency of the work in future.

§ Mr. GROVES

I find myself in a position now to support the Minister for, I think, the first time in my life. I think it is a very good step to hand over the question of vaccination to the local authorities. Experience has proved that vaccination is a frost. It has certainly not prevented smallpox, I feel sure that when the function of vaccination has been handed over to the local authorities, composed of intelligent men and women who are interested in public health, it will be a step which bids fair to suppress rather than to encourage vaccination in this country. I welcome this provision. 1060 So far as our borough is concerned, I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we shall do what we can to refuse to impose this fallacy upon the people. If people who are grown up wish to be vaccinated, let them be vaccinated, but I object to impose vaccination upon people in order to satisfy the medical profession. It has been a retrograde step in the past. Under the new provision local authorities will be able to apply sanitation and to abolish vaccination. I thank the right hon. Gentleman.