HC Deb 06 March 1963 vol 673 cc438-40

(1) There shall, in the case of premises to which this Act applies,—

  1. (a) be made, at suitable places, suitable and sufficient provision for enabling such of the clothing of the persons employed to work in the premises as is not worn by them during working hours to be hung up or otherwise accommodated; and
  2. (b) be made, for drying that clothing, such arrangements as are reasonably practicable or, if a standard of arrangements for drying that clothing is prescribed, such arrangements as conform to that standard.

(2) Where persons are employed to do such work in premises to which this Act applies as necessitates the wearing of special clothing, and they do not take that clothing home, there shall, in the case of those premises,—

  1. (a) be made, at suitable places, suitable and sufficient provision for enabling that clothing to be hung up or otherwise accommodated; and
  2. (b) be made, for drying that clothing, such arrangements as are reasonably practicable, or if a standard of arrangements for drying that clothing is prescribed, such arrangements as conform to that standard.

(3) The Minister may make regulations—

  1. (a) determining for premises to which this Act applies, or for any class of such premises, what is suitable and sufficient provision for the purposes of the foregoing provisions of this section;
  2. (b) prescribing for such premises as aforesaid, or for any class thereof, a standard of arrangements for drying clothing.—[Mr. Hare.]

Brought up, and read the First Time.

Mr. Hare

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

I do not know whether it would be convenient, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, to discuss with the new Clause the consequential Amendment in page 8, line 9, to leave out Clause 12.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir William Anstruther-Gray)

Yes, if that would be the wish of the House.

Mr. Hare

Members of the Standing Committee which considered the Bill will recall that I accepted the argument that, on balance, there was advantage in having a substantive provision instead of an enabling power to make regulations about accommodation for clothing. I believe that the Clause strikes the right balance.

Subsection (1) deals with outdoor clothing. Suitable and sufficient provision has to be made for accommodating it during working hours and reasonably practicable arrangements have to be made for drying it. Subsection (2) provides for similar arrangements for working clothes. Subsection (3) enables me by regulation to specify what is suitable and sufficient accommodation for clothing and standards of arrangements for drying it.

The Clause is intended to require that everything should be done to provide adequate facilities of this kind for employees while, at the same time, guarding against unreasonable demands upon employers. The main point is that I am substituting a substantive provision for an enabling power to achieve the same object.

Mr. E. C. Redhead (Walthamstow, West)

As the Minister has indicated, the new Clause is in replacement of the original Clause 12. As he will recall, that Clause came under strong criticism in Standing Committee, when I moved an Amendment designed to remedy what appeared to us to be the nebulous and unsatisfactory terminology of the original Clause. It was criticised because it seemed neither to give effect to the purposes of the Gowers Report nor comparable protection and provision for those covered by the Bill as is given by the Factories Act to industrial workers. I readily concede that the Minister has fulfilled his undertaking and has spelled out his intention more precisely and satisfactorily. What we now have before us is the substance, suitably adapted to the purposes of the Bill, of Section 59 of the Factories Act, 1961.

In welcoming the Minister's concession, however, I wish to utter a word of caution and an expression of hope that when he makes regulations under the powers which he is taking in subsection (3) he will be mindful of the comment by the Gowers Committee in paragraph 47 of its Report, because the power which he is taking is to make regulations defining what is suitable and sufficient provision for the purposes of the foregoing provisions of this section". These nebulous words seem to be inescapable in the Bill.

Like so much else in the Bill, the effectiveness of the Clause will depend, unhappily, not on what the Bill says but on the nature of the regulations that will be drafted by the Minister. I draw his attention once again to the opening words of paragraph 47 of the Gowers Report which says: Some witnesses, for the most part those representing clerical workers, told us that they thought it undesirable for employees to have no option but to hang wet outdoor clothing on ordinary hooks and pegs in the rooms in which they worked, and suggested that the provision of some form of locker or cloakroom accommodation should be compulsory. I hope, therefore, that when the Minister drafts his regulations under the power that he derives from the new Clause he will not be too easily persuaded as to the physical difficulties which, I suspect, some proprietors and employers in premises covered by the Bill might urge upon him as difficulties against making provision of a sufficient and suitable character. In short, I hope that the regulations will really give effect to the purposes of the new Clause and will not, in their turn, be as nebulous as the words of the original Clause which is now to be withdrawn.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.