HC Deb 20 February 1967 vol 741 cc1107-15

12.40 p.m.

Mr. John Wells (Maidstone)

I am grateful to the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour for coming at under an hour's notice to answer this short debate. The reason I have not given the hon. Gentleman longer notice was that I had hoped that the matter would be answered by the Minister of Health. Although I am well aware that the chief medical officers of the hon. Gentleman's Department are looking into the problem of cancer caused by blue asbestos, this matter was raised with me first by constituents of mine who had no connection whatever with the factory in question. They live near the factory, I admit, but I had had no complaint whatever from those actually working within the factory. This is a matter concerning the general health of the nation and for this reason I had presumed that the Ministry of Health would deal with it.

To put the matter simply and straightforwardly, I should like to read one or two extracts from letters from my constituents which express their fears. Appropriately enough, the first letter which I received on the subject was from a Mr. Ian Gunter, who wrote to me on 23rd January this year on the subject of asbestos dust and lung cancer. He states: My house is 1¼ miles in a direct line from"— a certain factory— and I and my neighbours are increasingly alarmed over the potentially grave risk to the health not only of our families and ourselves but also of all those living in the area as a result of the escape into the atmosphere of asbestos dust, particularly of the variety known as blue asbestos which, to my knowledge, is used in large quantities at the … factory. You will no doubt be aware of the considerable publicity given in recent months in the Sunday Times by their medical correspondent warning of the risk of incurable and invariably fatal lung tumours being caused through inhalation of asbestos dust. He then deals with a certain B.B.C. programme and asks me to look into the matter urgently.

I had a further letter from a neighbour of Mr. Gunter who said: You will be aware of the considerable correspondence in the national Press on this subject over several months. I can send copies of various articles should you so wish. As Mr. Gunter says"— that is, Mr. Ian Gunter— we live directly down the prevailing southwesterly wind from the … factory, and while I have already made extensive inquiries from the Hollingbourne Rural District Council in their capacity as public health authority, and have had correspondence and a personal interview with the medical officer of health, we have in the nature of things not progressed very far or very fast. The M.O.H. is writing to the … company about the use of blue asbestos, requesting them to cease their use of this material, but I am very much afraid that this will not have the desired effect. I myself have four young children residing at home, and they are. I am sure, entitled to be able to be free from this now known hazard. The M.O.H. feels the risk in my own locality to be slight, but admits that he does not know for sure, and goes on to say that 'the chief danger is from broken bags of this material', which means that from time to time we must be at risk: in any case, friends and other people live very much closer to the factory and are almost certainly at risk. There is reason to believe that the filtration plant of the factory is in good order, but there is the danger of handling the material on arrival, and the loading and disposal of the waste, which I believe is causing the M.O.H. special concern, and I am extremely worried by the whole situation. He goes on to say: I understand that the importation of this particular sort of asbestos only represents 5 per cent. of the national importation of asbestos, and I can see no justifiable reason why its importation and use should not be totally suspended pending full inquiries and research. Those two letters from which I have read substantial extracts set out the fears of my constituents, not only for themselves and their families, but for neighbours who live downwind from the factory.

I repeat that I have had no complaint from anybody working inside the factory. None of the workpeople has expressed anxiety to me. At the same time, however, I hope that the Minister will explain to the House what his Department is doing to safeguard people in factories. As the Minister of Health has clearly shirked his responsibility in this matter concerning national health, I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will do his best to allay the fears of people outside.

If the medical officer of health is right in thinking that the risk is slight, I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will give categorical support to what the medical officer of health says so that people need have no more fear. If, on the other hand, the slight doubt expressed by the medical officer of health has any justification, I hope that the Minister will take the strongest steps to forbid immediately and completely the use of this material until research has been concluded.

12.46 p.m.

Dr. John Dunwoody (Falmouth and Camborne)

I congratulate the hon. Member for Maidstone (Mr. John Wells) on raising this matter. There is, I think it is true to say, increasing disquiet among the medical profession at some strange and rather inexplicable facts relating to exposure to asbestos, both from the industrial viewpoint and from the point of view of the health of the community as a whole. Asbestos certainly seems to produce in some cases certain types of tumours. Perhaps we are right not to regard them as malignant tumours, but they cause progressive and, possibly, killing lung diseases.

I ask my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to do all he can, not only in his own Department, but in conjunction with his colleagues at the Ministry of Health, who, I feel sure, appreciate the problem, to initiate research so that we will not be as much in the dark as we are at present.

12.47 p.m.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Roy Hattersley)

The hon. Member for Maidstone (Mr. John Wells) was good enough to thank me for coming at what he described as an hour's notice to answer this debate. The hon. Member's thanks to me are quite unnecessary, but congratulations to him for his diligence in this matter are entirely appropriate. The hon. Member asked a Question last Monday and he has another down for today. In between, he has taken advantage of the opportunity given to him this morning to raise the matter again. He is to be congratulated on his enthusiasm for getting it straightened out.

I am sorry that I must disappoint the hon. Member in terms of answering his question about the general health aspects of asbestos. He will understand that the responsibilities of my Department are confined to the industrial hazards and the industrial safety aspect. Therefore, I am able neither to confirm nor deny the advice given to the hon. Member's constituents by the local medical officer of health and I must simply confine what I say to the other aspects which fall directly within the purview of the Ministry of Labour.

By raising the matter this morning, the hon. Member has been successful in anticipating by 2 hours 40 minutes an Answer, which will be given him this afternoon by my colleague the hon. Member for Jarrow (Mr. Fernyhough). In anticipation of that Answer, perhaps I may fill in a little of the background as it is seen in the Ministry of Labour.

The hon. Member will already know that an announcement has been made that a panel of experts, under the chairmanship of Her Majesty's Senior Medical Inspector of Factories, has been appointed to review the medical aspects of this case. It is possible to say with prejudicing any of its conclusions that three things are already known. The first is that there is an increase in asbestosis throughout the industry. Secondly, there is an increase in lung cancer among the people who initially suffer from that disease. Thirdly, there is a connection between exposure to asbestos and various rare but almost invariably fatal forms of cancer. One can say that without prejudicing the results of the inquiry, because it is those three facts which make the inquiry necessary and have resulted in its being brought about.

It is also possible to put the use of asbestos into industrial perspective, for example, the simple fact that it is being used more often and in greater quantities today than at any time in our industrial history and that over 20,000 people are engaged in working on it or with it. That does not mean that they are working on blue asbestos, which is the particularly virulent sort. The hon. Gentleman was right in saying that only about 5 per cent. of the asbestos used in this country is of that type. Nevertheless, there are 20,000 people exposed to the risk which comes from working with asbestos in general.

One of the hon. Gentleman's constituents wrote to him or to the medical officer asking why some Ministry—perhaps my own would not be the most appropriate —did not ban the use of this asbestos until the final medical evidence was more clear than it is today.

The simple answer is that, in an economy which is expanding and more and more dependent upon special products and special operations, asbestos is increasingly important and in many ways cannot be replaced by other materials. Certainly the factory inspectors urge industry to use alternatives whenever possible. But it is far from always being a practical proposition. This is particularly true about blue asbestos, which is used in many instances to produce commodities which could not be produced in the same way, at the same quality and at the same speed were other materials used. It is particularly important in producing goods and materials where strength is a vital factor.

Blue asbestos has a greater tensile quality than any posible alternatives. It would not be possible for many of the important industries which are involved in the production of materials into which this commodity goes to be told overnight that some alternative had to be found. We have no reason to believe that a viable alternative exists. Therefore, although only about 5 per cent. of the asbestos industry uses this specific commodity, it would not be possible to outlaw its use even during the short time before new asbestos regulations are brought into force.

As the House will be told in answer to the hon. Gentleman's Question later today, new asbestos regulations are to be considered. In the light of that, I should make it clear why the new regulations are being considered and why they are so necessary.

They are in part necessary because of the expansion in the use of asbestos, not only in quantitative terms but in terms of new processes which have been discovered and are being applied since the Asbestos Regulations were prepared 30 years ago before many of these new processes were invented. Some are like those which go on in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, where there is a substantial factory producing floor-covering with an asbestos base. Brake linings, heating and ventilating components in general are produced under conditions for which the pre- sent Asbestos Regulations are not sufficiently comprehensive. Therefore, the Minister is announcing today that new regulations are being considered which will have a wider application, will cover increasing numbers of asbestos products and will have special reference to those industrial processes which produce large quantities of asbestos dust.

In conclusion, I can say that the Ministry is aware of the problems which working with asbestos in general and this form in particular pose to British industry. We are anxious that the regulations should be re-formed in such a way as to provide security and safety for those members of the industry who work on this form of asbestos and on asbestos in general.

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will bear with us while those regulations are being revised in the knowledge that, in some of the things which he has raised his persistence has been a contribution to making sure that the regulations are revised. It is the intention of the Ministry of Labour to bring about the revision as quickly as possible.

Mr. John Wells

With the leave of the House, may I ask the hon. Gentleman three questions? First, when may we expect the regulations to come into force? Can we have an approximate date? Second, will the panel of medical experts be prepared to take evidence and hear views from my constituents living in the neighbourhood? Can the hon. Gentleman make arrangements for them to express their views to the panel? Third, as he is unwilling, quite rightly, to accept the nationwide health responsibility for people outside factories, can he advise me how I can make the Minister of Health face up to his responsibility in this matter?

Mr. Hattersley

Perhaps the way to make the Minister of Health face up to his responsibility, as the hon. Gentleman puts it, is to raise the matter on the Adjournment. That is a technique which the hon. Gentleman does not seem slow to apply—

Mr. Wells

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I apologise to the Parliamentary Secretary for interrupting him, but that is exactly what I sought to do this morning with the Minister of Health, who has run off, shirking his duty— admittedly in a most courteous way. He has told you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and the Clerk at the Table, that he has no responsibility for this matter. But he has responsibility for the health of the nation. May I seek your guidance as to how an hon. Member can pin the Minister down?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That is not a matter for the Chair. The responsibility which the Chair accepts is the responsibility which the Minister himself believes that he accepts. The hon. Gentleman must seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment, and the Chair will rule whether the matter is out of order at the time.

Mr. Hattersley

I have tried not to take issue with the hon. Gentleman on three occasions when he has chosen to say something which I regard as inaccurate about my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, in case he or other hon. Members might think that my criticisms were the result more of the fact that I first heard of the hon. Gentleman's intention to raise this matter 50 minutes ago, than of my resentment and disagreement with his criticisms of my right hon. Friend. I am sure that on reflection the hon. Gentleman will feel that such criticisms are more appropriately aired when my right hon. Friend is here.

He asked when the new regulations would be brought into operation. I am sure that he understands that as it is not yet possible to say when the new regulations will be formulated it is equally impossible to say when they will be put into operation.

In answer to his second point, anyone who has appropriate and relevant evidence to give to the inquiry will be given that opportunity, and I will see that instructions are issued to cater for any of the hon. Gentlemen's constituents who are in that category and may want to give evidence to the inquiry which has been set up.

The debate having been concluded, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER suspended the sitting till half-past Two o'clock pursuant to Order (Sittings of the House (Morning Sittings)).

Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.