AGRICULTURE (TRACTOR CABS)

HC Deb 21 June 1967 vol 748 cc1652-73

11.8 a.m.

Mr. Hoy

I beg to move, That the Agriculture (Tractor Cabs) Regulations 1967, a draft of which was laid before this House on 31st May, be approved. I commend these Regulations to the House as a much needed method of dealing with what is probably the most serious problem of safety in agriculture; the overturning tractor. In the past 10 years 423 people have been killed when their tractors overturned, about one-third of all the fatalities in agriculture. Last year the number was 53, nearly two-fifths of all the fatalities in the industry.

We therefore have a problem which is certainly getting no better and which is, perhaps, getting worse. It is impossible to say for certain how many people survive overturning tractor accidents, but it can be said that they are not many. It is clear that if we can find a way of stopping two-fifths of the fatal accidents in agriculture, we must take it; and I hope there will be no dispute about that.

When the House considered the draft Field Machinery Regulations in 1962, the then Parliamentary Secretary said that consultations had already begun to see whether this problem could be tackled by Regulations requiring the compulsory use of safety cabs on all tractors driven by employed workers. There is, therefore, no difference of opinion between the parties on the need for Regulations, if they are the best means of dealing with the matter.

In the past few years my Department and many other organisations have used every means in their power to try to bring the seriousness of the problem home to the farming community and to all those concerned with agriculture; but the number of overturnings has not decreased. This is not because the members of the agricultural community are irresponsible or inattentive so much as because there are such a large number of possible causes of overturning, and it is often due to a brief moment of carelessness by someone of considerable experience and skill.

It seems clear to us that exhortation is not enough. A solution of the problem might conceivably come one day through a fundamental redesigning of the tractor, which has changed little in its essential form in the last 40 years. Research of this kind is going on, but it is an extremely long-term business and may not produce any useful results in the end.

We have to act now if we want even to reduce the number of deaths in the next decades, let alone to end them.

It may well be that the tractor has changed little because its present form is the best suited to the many tasks which it has to perform. I do not accept that the addition of a safety frame will have any significant effect on the tractor's centre of gravity. It will certainly have less effect than many of the attachments that are at present used on tractors to perform different farming operations.

We have at least one example before us which I think it would be folly to ignore—that of Sweden. Regulations very much on the lines that we are proposing were introduced in Sweden in 1959. Before they came into force there was a serious death roll there from overturning tractors. Since then there has only been one death, and this was of a man who tried to jump clear instead of letting the safety cab protect him.

I have given the reasons why Regulations are needed. I now turn to what the proposed Regulations would do. The main provision would prevent a new tractor being sold or let on hire to anyone who was going to use it in agriculture, unless it was fitted with an approved safety cab or frame. It would lay on the employer the obligation to ensure that every tractor driven by a worker was properly fitted with an approved safety cab or frame, and on the worker an obligation not to drive a tractor that was not properly fitted with such a cab or frame.

These provisions are contained in Regulations No. 4 and No. 5. All the other provisions are really ancillary to these and I will mention only the main ones.

In what I say hereafter, perhaps I may use the word "cab", as the Regulations do, to include a frame. The Ministers will be empowered to approve models of safety cabs by means of a certificate of approval after they are satisfied that the model will meet, in respect of a particular type of tractor, the British Standard Specification for the Safety Requirements and Testing of Safety Cabs and Safety Frames for Agricultural Wheeled Tractors. The approved safety cab will have to be marked with the approval mark and the name of the make or model of the tractor, or tractors, for which it is approved. These provisions are contained in Regulation No. 3.

Regulation No. 7 restricts the application of these marks to the manufacturer, unless the consent of the appropriate Minister is given in writing to some other person applying the marks.

Regulation No. 6 lays on the worker the obligation to report all overturning accidents and all damage to the safety cab or its fittings to his employer. This will enable the employer to ensure that the cab is still in a state fit to use since Regulation No. 3(5) lays down that … an approved safety cab shall cease to be approved if it is materially changed as a result of damage, alteration, neglect or any other cause. These are the basic provisions of the Regulations.

Regulation No. 5(4), however, provides very important exemptions. They set out the circumstances in which tractors may be used without safety cabs if it is not reasonably practicable to carry out the agricultural operation concerned with a cab fitted. These exemptions must mean some weakening of the Regulations. It is impossible to be certain that the risk of fatal accidents has been eliminated unless all tractors are fitted with safety cabs, but the risks must be balanced against the realities of the situation and what is economically and physically practicable.

It is clear that there are some kinds of agricultural work in which, particularly at certain times of the year, it is not practicable to use a cab without damaging the crop or getting stuck or knocking a hole in a building or simply not being able to do the job at all.

We have exempted what seem to us and to those we have consulted the really difficult cases—orchards, hop gardens, and work in or near buildings and driving to and from these. But these exemptions apply only to cases where it is not reasonably practicable to use a safety frame.

It would not, therefore, be sensible to carry the exemption back to the sale of tractors, since the responsibility for ensuring that the tractor is sold with a properly fitted and approved safety cab must be laid on the seller, and he could not possibly satisfy himself that any particular tractor would be used only for exempt operations, nor could the buyer honestly give such an assurance.

The exemptions are certainly necessary, but we have had to consider them with great care since clearly if exemptions are drawn too wide the whole purpose of the Regulations will be defeated.

We did not consider, for example, that we could exempt a whole operation if merely one part of it was carried out in a low building—for instance, the mucking out of a pig sty and the carrying of the muck for spreading on a field some distance away. This is a distinct agricultural operation and the risks of the tractor overturning are in no way affected by the fact that the muck has come from a low building.

It is clear that in some cases the Regulations will call for changes in farming practice, but we are allowing reasonable time for these changes to be carried out, and in our view they are a small price to pay for the saving of human life that will result.

Regulation No. 8 includes provisions for the Ministers to grant specific, as distinct from general, exemptions from the Regulations. The main use of this power will be for research and development, but it may also be used sparingly for cases in which a specialised operation or piece of equipment can be shown to render the use of a safety cab impossible.

I think I should stress that these cases are expected to be few. Manufacturers are well aware of the design requirements imposed by the multifarious uses of the tractor, and the British Standard includes provisions for the testing of cabs in conditions of practical use.

The final main point is the dates of coming into operation of the various Regulations. The Regulations dealing with approval and marking will come into force at once so that any cabs that have already been produced and are satisfactory can be granted a certificate of approval as soon as possible.

The Regulations will apply to new tractors in three years' time. This is the minimum time it will take to get sufficient production to have approved safety cabs available for all new tractors. There are considerable problems of design and production and I am satisfied that it would be unreasonable and impracticable to lay down a shorter period.

So far as used tractors are concerned —that is to say, tractors which have already been sold for use in agriculture by the purchaser before 1st September, 1970—the obligations on farmers, workers and those who hire out tractors will not come into operation for a further seven years. This may seem a long time, though the National Farmers' Union has suggested to us that these tractors should never be covered.

What we think has to be done is to strike a balance between allowing tractors to be used by workers in agriculture without safety cabs indefinitely and diverting resources to the provision and expensive testing of cabs for a small number of different types of obsolescent tractor. Some fairly arbitrary date had to be chosen, and 10 years seems not unreasonable.

Mr. John Brewis (Galloway)

Are these safety cabs freely available on the market at present?

Mr. Hoy

I was not saying that they are freely available. We think that it would take some time to have them ready to meet the whole of our needs.

At that time, most used tractors will be at or near the end of their useful life, and the final implementation of the Regulations should then be achieved with the minimum of dislocation and expense.

This is, of course, the statutory timetable. I hope many farmers will, in the interests of their workers and their own peace of mind, use tractors fitted with safety cabs or frames as soon as they are reasonably available. I think that that goes part of the way to meet the hon. Gentleman's point.

The officers of both the agricultural Departments will, of course, always be ready to help and advise farmers, manufacturers, dealers and anyone else who may be concerned. In the course of the period in which these Regulations have been under consideration, we have consulted all the interested organisations and have been able to meet the great majority of the points raised. I think we have reached a wide measure of agreement and I want to express our thanks and say how grateful we are to all those who have been able to help us.

The National Farmers' Union, though accepting that the modifications that have been made have taken into account many of the points it put forward, still thinks that the proper solution is more research into tractor design. As I have said already, we think that the problem is too serious to wait for the uncertain results of such research.

We recognise that the point where the balance is struck between the need to save life and the avoidance of significant extra expense and interference with agricultural practice is bound to be a matter of opinion. We have considered these questions very carefully for a long time. There is certainly no question of any hasty action, and we think that we have got it as right as it can be got. I am fairly confident that during the next 10 years the members of the N.F.U. will come to share our opinion.

These Regulations will be the eleventh set made under the Act of 1956. I think that they are among the most important. The overturning tractor is the greatest single killer in agriculture. I am confident that these Regulations will curb and eventually cure this extremely serious problem. With the utmost confidence, I commend them to the House.

11.25 a.m.

Mr. Peter Mills (Torrington)

We welcome the new Regulations which the Minister has brought before the House this morning. They will go some way to reduce the number of accidents and fatalities on British farms. We have some reservations, but they are a step in the right direction. On many occasions in the past, I have raised this problem in the House, as have other hon. Members. At least something is being done to overcome these tragic accidents.

Over the years, there has been a gradual increase in the number of accidents on our farms. In my own constituency, there were three last year, which is a sorry story, and I shall never forget the screams of a man as he came down a hill with his tractor out of control and subsequently was killed. That accident made a lasting impression on me, and it is one reason why I have raised the question so constantly in the House. The Regulations are designed to try to stop this appalling waste of life, because, unless something is done, this type of accident will occur more frequently. We are seeing more mechanisation on our farms, and the need to use every inch of ground will mean that there probably will be more accidents in the future. These Regulations will become more important as the years go by.

I am still unhappy about the problem of fields on very steep hills, which occur frequently in the South-West. They are known to be dangerous, and I feel that the use of four-wheeled tractors on them should be banned. I appreciate that legislation is impossible, but farmers and employees should be warned that, in spite of safety cabs, tractors should not be used on such fields.

Even with the coming of these Regulations, education is still the major factor in reducing the number of accidents, because no amount of safety devices will help unless farmers and farm workers are educated in the right ways of using their tractors and the implements provided. Some may feel that the Regulations are unnecessary and, to use a common word, "cissy". We should do well to remind such people that these accidents happen very suddenly, and it is wise to be prepared. Farm workers and farmers need to be educated that, even with safety cabs, risks must not be taken. The danger spots are still turning sharply on sloping ground, working on silage pits and on very steep fields, which I have mentioned, and using tractors with worn and smooth tyres which, because of the high cost of tyres, is becoming more and more common these days. I hope that the educational campaign which the Ministry conducts in co-operation with other bodies will continue.

Turning to the Regulations themselves, I wish to ask the hon. Gentleman a few questions. For example, why is it not possible for cabs to be transferred from one tractor to another? If a safety cab fits, surely this concession should be allowed, and when the time comes to replace an old tractor surely a safety cab could be used again, provided that it is in good order.

We welcome the exemptions in respect of hop-gardens, yards, orchards and buildings. However, a small farmer who may be exempted when working inside a building will be faced with a problem when mucking out with a single tractor. Normally, he mucks out with his fork loader and loads his dung spreader. He comes outside and hitches up again and then goes out to his fields. The Regulations mean that he will have to put back his cab, which may be a two-hour job. The process would be repeated when he comes back for a second load, because a single load of dung is not usual. This point ought to be cleared up, otherwise a small farmer with a single tractor will be at a serious disadvantage.

Another practice which is becoming more frequent is to have tractors which are used only in covered buildings. Why is it necessary for such a vehicle to have a safety cab? The cost of these cabs is quite high, and I believe that this is an unnecessary expense. Will these safety cabs qualify for any grants? The cost of a cab on a medium-sized tractor is between 8 per cent. and 10 per cent. of the total cost, and 5 per cent. if it is just a safety frame. A grant would certainly be useful and help to offset the extra cost. Cost is an important factor, and I trust that manufacturers will do everything that they can to keep this to a minimum.

I hope that the Minister will spell out clearly for even the simplest farmer, if I may so put it, that a safety cab does not mean an enclosed cab. The definition of a "safety cab" in the interpretation paragraph contains the phrase, and includes a safety frame. It ought to be made clear in the farming Press that a safety cab does not necessarily mean an enclosed cab. One can, as it were, choose the cheaper variety of safety cab, that is the safety frame.

I turn now to the circular which most hon. Members have received from the N.F.U. It is interesting to see the criticisms which are made, and I would like the Minister to explain in a little more detail what has happened during this long period of negotiations with the N.F.U. Why did the N.F.U. suddenly seem to change its views? I believe that it made quite a point of the fact that it believes agricultural tractors to be basically wrong in design, and it criticised these proposals by saying: The fitment of cabs or frames will cause the already high centre of gravity of these vehicles to be raised still further, thus making them even more prone to overturn. That may or may not be so, and I was glad that the Minister quoted, as I was going to, the action which Swedish agriculturalists and the Government there have taken. It proves to me that the tractors which we have in existence at the moment, if fitted with a safety cab, are still safe, and I think that this rather throws out the complaint and the criticisms made by the N.F.U.

One thing that we must do is press on with research into design. I do not believe that we can wait for this to be completed. There are hundreds of tractors which must be made safe now. We cannot wait for years while research into design is completed. We simply cannot afford this delay. In the long-term proposals I hope that the Minister will give every encouragement to research into design, because this must take place, but, as I say, we cannot wait for this to be completed before taking action to make our tractors safe.

I believe that we must look into the whole question of the design of our implements, as well as the tractors, because many accidents occur with implements which upset the balance of a tractor.

I have asked the Minister a number of questions, and I hope he will make it clear, not only to us but to farmers and farm workers, where we stand with regard to the matters that I have raised. I believe that these Regulations are a start. Modifications may have to be made in the future, and indeed much more needs to be done, but I believe that we should start to work together to stop the appalling waste of life on our farms.

11.33 a.m.

The Marquess of Hamilton (Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Although for the moment these Regulations will not be applicable to Northern Ireland, there is considerable interest in them, for there is an acute awareness amongst the farming community in Ireland of the danger element from overturning tractors, a danger which is accentuated by the need for intensive silage-making, for two-fifths of the fatal accidents occur during silage-making when the tractor is on the silage pit and consolidation is being carried out. Although safety rails at either end of a covered silage pit help to some extent to prevent the tractor from going over, it is hoped that the Government will press ahead with the development of alternate methods for consolidation in order to make working conditions far safer than they are at present on the silage pit. Because of the smallness in size of farm holdings in Northern Ireland, the average farmer is just not in a position to erect silos as is his counterpart in many areas of the United Kingdom. Furthermore, we must remember that tractor cabs will lessen visibility during the silage-making, and will be intolerable during warm weather.

I agree with the N.F.U. that the crux of the danger of tractors overturning is due to the outdated design of the so-called modern tractor. It is here that the maximum research must be carried out immediately. At the same time I would like to see a general campaign mounted to eliminate all the prevailing dangers in tractor work, wherever possible.

11.35 a.m.

Sir Clive Bossom (Leominster)

I am very glad that the exemption period is no longer to finish at the end of September, as was first suggested for these draft Regulations. I think that this is right, because in Herefordshire hops are not always in by September, nor is the harvesting of apples always completed by then.

As has been said this morning, what the Government must now do is carry out a major "public relations exercise" with the entire farming community during the next two years, anyhow well before 1st September, 1970, because there is still considerable doubt, especially in the N.F.U., that these Regulations are completely practicable or workable, and that there are not some flaws and anomalies in them.

Many farmers in my part of the world have grave doubts about whether manufacturers have got the complete answer in their design, because there are one or two designs on the market already—these new safety cabs are still not foolproof and are too expensive. Therefore, during the next two years a tremendous amount of research must be carried out both by the Government and by the manufacturers to find a still better, cheaper, and more foolproof design.

What effect will these Regulations have on our export market? Has the hon. Gentleman discussed this with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade? In 1965 exports of farm machinery were worth £129 million, of which £65 million was for tractors. In 1966 exports of farm machinery were worth nearly £142 million, £104 million of which was for tractors. These figures show that there is a fast expanding market for tractors. If a new safety cab costs between £70 and £100, will this price our tractors out of foreign markets? I realise that cabs can be unbolted and tractors can be sold without cabs, but indirectly this must have some effect on the end price.

Will the Government, having heard what has been said this morning, be prepared to double their efforts into reseach, and also try to help manufacturers do the same? Having just returned from Sweden, I know that they insist on safety cabs there. I agree with everything that the Minister has said about Sweden this morning. I understand that Denmark will soon follow with new regulations, and it must be only a matter of time before most of the Common Market countries follow suit with similar provisions. I would like to know his opinion of the way in which it will affect our exports.

On 14th February, 1966, I asked the Minister whether he intended to introduce legislation for Land Rovers, Austin Gypsies, and Mercedes Uni-Goys, because at that time he stated that he had no evidence of a need to extend the provisions to other types of agricultural vehicles. Since then, has he changed his views? I should like to know whether he is satisfied that these other types of vehicle are completely safe and are not likely to overturn.

11.40 a.m.

Mr. James Davidson (Aberdeenshire, West)

I welcome the Regulations. I speak not only as a practical farmer but as a member of the area executive of my N.F.U. In my opinion these Regulations are long overdue. They are absolutely necessary, and I welcome them heartily. In my part of north-eastern Scotland we have a lot of very steep land. I appreciate what the hon. Member says about banning the use of tractors on steep ground but it is not practicable. It would cut out at least one-third of the agricultural and arable land in the north-east of Scotland. I have two adjoining fields which together amount to about 20 acres only, and from top to bottom of the two there is a 250 feet drop. On many occasions I have driven a tractor with two wheels off the ground and I know how easy it is to overturn a tractor, however careful one is. These Regulations are long overdue.

A critical factor is the height of the centre of gravity of a vehicle above the ground. I agree with what has been said about the need for new thinking in the design of tractors, and I wonder whether it would be of assistance if it were made compulsory on the sale of new tractors to include in the published specifications of the vehicle the height of the centre of gravity. This might be a yardstick for comparison between different tractors, and it might also be a good selling point as well as an incentive towards better design.

I realise that this factor is closely linked with the distance between the wheels, but in many tractors this distance is adjustable. It is a simple calculation. If one knows the height of the centre of gravity and the distance between the wheels one can easily work out the turning moment. This would be a selling point, and I commend it to the Minister for consideration as a compulsory specification on the sale of new tractors.

I accept the Minister's explanation of the time lag between now and the coming into force of the Regulations, but it still seems rather a long time.

11.43 a.m.

Mr. W. H. Loveys (Chichester)

I welcome any safety Regulations concerning agricultural machinery. Many such Regulations have been introduced in the last few decades and enormous strides have been made in modernisation. Nevertheless, we have been backward in the design of the tractor, which is the basic machine of the industry. Many farmers, the National Farmers Union—which has sent out the memorandum to which reference has been made—and certain hon. Members with whom I have talked are concerned about the Regulations, but I suggest that any employer who has had a fatal accident on his farm will welcome them. This morning the Parliamentary Secretary has told us that no less than one-third of the fatalities in agriculture are caused by tractors overturning.

The N.F.U., which is usually most realistic, sensible and co-operative in these matters, is distressed because it feels that the question of safety cabs is being treated too hastily. I feel that the opposite is the case, and that we are backward in this respect. The N.F.U. is probably correct in saying that if the Regulations are carried out there is a possibility that more tractors will overturn. The difference in design might make it marginally easier for a tractor to overturn, but the risk of a fatality will be very much reduced.

It is wrong for people to blame the manufacturers for the present design. I am glad to hear that they are having another look at the matter. The Parliamentary Secretary has told us, however, that it may be some years before a decision is reached, and even then he doubted whether a great deal could be done on the question of design.

I welcome the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, West (Mr. James Davidson). It is a very sensible one. I can probably claim to have spent more tractor-driving hours than any other hon. Member. I did this when I was young and rather foolish. I used to drive the things flat out, and threw them up over banks and did other foolish things with them, but I never succeeded in overturning one. We cannot say that the basic design of a tractor is to blame.

We should support the Regulations, but should bear in mind that, like all safety measures, it introduces certain complications, most of which have been mentioned. I am glad that special exemptions are to be made in respect of tractors used in hop fields, orchards and buildings. This is right, because apart from the complications involved in using vehicles with cabs under such conditions the kind of situation which will be likely to cause a tractor to overturn does not exist under those conditions.

This leaves the awkward situation that arises when tractors are used for removing litter and manure from buildings, when the vehicle is used partly inside the building and partly outside it. This is a most difficult problem to overcome. There is good reason for exempting tractors used in such conditions. The tractor would not need a cab when used in a building, and if it is necessary to put one on when it goes outside it may take a couple of hours, and it is nonsense to have to spend that time before going outside to spread one's manure.

The other anomaly to which attention is drawn by the N.F.U. memorandum arises from the fact that all new tractors must be sold with a safety cab fitted. I admit the difficulties arising in respect of the earlier problem, but this one could be overcome. If a tractor is to be used in a category of work which will in any case be exempted from the provisions it would seem an unnecessary expense and a nonsense to insist on a cab being fitted. If the Minister can assure us that he will increase the range of exemptions, and if possible exempt tractors used in cleaning out buildings and all new tractors purchased for use in work which is to be exempted under the provisions the Regulations will have my full and unqualified support.

11.50 a.m.

Mr. Paul Hawkins (Norfolk, South-West)

I want to add my praise in respect of the Regulations. I come from the eastern counties, where most of the land is flat, and when I first read the National Farmers' Union memorandum I was inclined to agree with what it said. Having examined some of the figures concerning accidents, however, I agree with other hon. Members that the N.F.U. is mistaken and that we ought not to delay any longer in introducing this reasonable measure to improve safety.

It will add to both capital and working costs, and in this connection I hope that the cabs will be so designed that it will not need two hours to put them on and take them off. The method of fixing should be as simple as possible, and it should be possible also to put on what I call the "weather" cab when the safety frame is in position. In other words, it should not be necessary to have to take off the safety frame in order to put on a weather cab, which may also incorporate a weather frame.

The word "cab", which is used rather frequently in the Regulations, is somewhat misleading to the average farmer, and I hope that a fairly major publicity campaign will be mounted when the frames are designed to explain exactly what is required.

The majority of accidents in my district occur in the Fens, where we have wide dykes and where people try to work every inch of the ground up to the dyke side, with the result that many of the fatalities are due to drowning.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary give us some idea of the type of frame that is envisaged? Can he say how much it is likely to cost, so that people may know that in advance? The Explanatory Note states: These Regulations require tractors to be fitted with safety cabs … when driven by workers … Do I understand from that wording that the self-employed farmer driving his own tractor is not affected? If that is so, it is a pity. Regulations like these should cover those men also. Many of them are small farmers, and the whole farm and the family depend on the one man. The Regulations probably do cover these farmers also, but I should like to be reassured.

I welcome the Regulations, and I hope they will have the desired effect of reducing these awful casualties which occur all too frequently in many districts.

11.53 a.m.

Mr. Edward M. Taylor (Glasgow, Cathcart)

I welcome these Regulations as, I am sure, most Scottish Members will. Reference has been made to the steady rise in the number of accidents involving tractors, and in Scotland this rise has been even greater than elsewhere. In 1964, seven farmers or agricultural workers were killed when working tractors. The number rose to nine in 1965, and in 1966, which is the latest year for which figures are available, it rose to 13. In two years, therefore, fatalities rose from seven to 13.

I understand that the only figures for injuries, as opposed to fatalities, come from the Ministry of Social Security in relation to industrial injury benefit, and, therefore, do not include self-employed farmers. We have a substantial number of small farmers in Scotland and a number of hill farms in the North. Farmers and agricultural workers there are, perhaps, more vulnerable to tractor accidents, and it is unfortunate that we do not have a means of getting full details. I hope that steps can be taken to get more information about tractor accidents. On the other hand, no matter what we do by means of regulations to make the working of farm machinery safe, the factor of human error remains the most significant. I hope that our discussion this morning will further spotlight the dangers that can be associated with the use of tractors, and emphasise the need for other forms of safety on farms.

11.55 a.m.

Mr. J. B. Godber (Grantham)

We have had a very useful debate, and I do not want to add a great deal to it. On a personal basis, I have always taken a great interest in safety Regulations for farms. The Parliamentary Secretary has told us that this is the eleventh set of such Regulations. I had the privilege of introducing the first set, and also the second and third sets, so that I know some of the problems connected with their introduction. I add my personal welcome to these Regulations and share the views expressed by my hon. Friends and others as to their value.

I am a little surprised—I do not say it particularly critically—that there has been no support this morning from the benches opposite, because I know that one or two of the Parliamentary Secretary's hon. Friends have taken an interest in the subject and, as the hon. Gentleman has said, this is one of the most important sets of safety Regulations we have had.

When I was closely connected with the office which the hon. Gentleman now holds, I always felt that tractors and, perhaps, power-driven circular saws were the two greatest sources of danger on farms. It is therefore right that we should have these present Regulations which, I hope, will safeguard many farm workers. Those of us who have had this type of fatality in our constituencies know the great tragedies that are involved. For that reason, particularly, I welcome the introduction of these Regulations. I share the views expressed this morning about the risks involved in tractor driving, risks sometimes not fully realised by the farmer himself or his workers.

I hope that we shall have a substantial variety of approved types of cab, whether enclosed or not enclosed, as the purchaser may wish, and that there will be adequate supplies available by the time the Regulations come into force. I believe that the National Institute of Agricultural Engineering has been responsible for the approval of cab designs and has done a great deal of work in this connection. Is the Institute being given more encouragement and, perhaps, financial encouragement in assisting in the design considerations to which the Parliamentary Secretary and others have referred? The hon. Gentleman knows that the N.I.A.E. has done a great deal of pioneering work in connection with agricultural machinery, and if money is to be spent on fundamental changes of design, the Institute, certainly in collaboration with the manufacturers, could probably do a great deal to assist.

It has always been held that the driving wheel of a tractor should be large in order to get the necessary grip, and it is the radius of this wheel that determines the centre of gravity of the vehicle. If anything could be done to provide a more adequate grip with a somewhat smaller driving force, whether by the design of the tyre or by the way in which the vehicle is powered, it would be an advance. We might even consider front-wheel drive. We know that the introduction of front-wheel drive has brought about a great deal of change in motor cars, and its use might make it possible to get a grip with a lower centre of gravity.

I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will not only tell us something about the cabs themselves but will initiate some discussions either with the manufacturers or the N.I.A.E., or with both, with a view to taking account of the main point in the N.F.U. memorandum. It is rather remarkable that with all the work that has been done for safety on the farms, this is the first occasion on which the N.F.U. has in any way criticised safety regulations. Hon. Members have given a fair appreciation of that criticism, and I will not repeat their remarks.

It is worth remembering that the farmers have borne, I believe gladly, substantial increased expenditure in implementing the various Regulations that have been passed. The Parliamentary Secretary will agree that, in the main, they have given warm co-operation and that they are to be commended for their attitude. This being so, when they have criticisms, the Department should look at them sympathetically.

I hope that, whatever the criticisms, the farmers will accept this as a necessary provision, although I thought that there was great force in the last criticism made in the document to which reference has been made; the anomaly about forcing all new tractors to be sold with cabs, even when they are to be used for exempted purposes. Subject to that, I warmly welcome these Regulations.

12.2 p.m.

Mr. Hoy

I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Grantham (Mr. Godber) for his remarks and to all hon. Members for the way in which they have welcomed these Regulations. It has given me great pleasure to have the privilege of introducing these Regulations and I feel a sense of pride in having been given this job, for we are dealing with a subject affecting the very lives of agricultural workers.

Many questions have been asked and I will do my best to answer as many of them as possible. The hon. Member for Torrington (Mr. Peter Mills) asked, "Why did the N.F.U. change its mind?" I suggest that he puts that question to the N.F.U. The Union is, of course, entitled to change its mind. I regret that it has done so on this occasion, although the remarks of hon. Members show that it is a change of mind which has not commended itself to the House.

I was asked whether cabs could be transferred to new tractors on the sale of old ones. The answer is that they can. If a farmer provides the dealer with an approved cab, it may be fitted to the new tractor. Many hon. Members have spoken about the need for safety education. We have carried out an extensive programme in this respect, with lectures, television programmes, handbills and so on. It is important that this work should not go by the board and we will, therefore, intensify it and ensure that what has been done is followed up.

It is rather amusing to think that, whenever we discuss agriculture, hon. Members ask, "What is the grant?" It does not seem to matter what we are debating, as long as there is a grant. In this case the new investment grant will be applied to approved cabs. However, when moving the Motion I was more concerned with the cost in terms of human lives, and that must be pre-eminent in our thoughts when discussing this matter. However, the grant will be payable.

Reference has been made to the difficulty of removing the cab and later returning it to the tractor when such jobs as muck spreading are undertaken. As I said at the outset, farming practices will have to be altered. This is a small price to pay if we are to save lives. While there may be some inconvenience—and I hope that it will be minimal—we could not to go on extending the exemptions much further without making the whole thing so open that the Regulations might become valueless. We have tried to meet all the legitimate requests that have been made, but I do not propose to extend the exemptions at this time.

There may be something in what the hon. Member for Norfolk, South-West (Mr. Hawkins) said about designing cabs so that the task of taking them off and putting them on again is made comparatively easy. I am sure that those engaged in this work will consider that suggestion. They will obviously want to ensure that the cabs are not only efficient and will perform the job for which they are made but that the fixing and unfixing of them may be done simply and easily. They are bound to take that into account, remembering that British engineers are among the leaders in this sphere. They are not likely to overlook a point of this kind.

I was asked about the exemption of cabs when tractors are used for only a certain type of work. The dealer cannot satisfy himself about the work that will be performed by the vehicle. In any case, it would be extremely difficult for a farmer honestly to give an assurance that all the work would be of the type that is exempted. This is one of those practical difficulties of life, although we have attempted to cover this and other difficulties in the most efficient way.

Reference was made to the present price of cabs. We expect the price to fall considerably when full-scale production begins. It will be agreed that this happens with most engineering projects. In this connection, I was asked whether research into cab design would be encouraged. The main reason for the three-year delay is to enable this very job to be tackled. We want people to design these cabs in the full knowledge of all the factors involved, and I assure hon. Members that we will do all we can to encourage improvements in design to be made. I was asked to give our views about Land Rovers and similar vehicles. We are satisfied that it is unnecessary to apply these Regulations to that type of vehicle.

Hon. Members wondered what effect the Regulations would have on exports. I recently had the privilege of visiting a factory at Diss. It has a tremendous export record and I understand—if I remember aright—that 50 to 60 per cent. of its production goes overseas. This is a valuable trade for Britain and is a remarkable tribute to British engineering. When we are sometimes too critical of ourselves we should remember the first-class job that British engineering is doing in this respect.

The British Standard specification in this matter is in line with international standards and there is no reason to think that the Regulations will have an adverse effect on exports. On the contrary, exporters are more likely to find, in due course, that cabs are required by more and more overseas countries.

The hon. Member for Norfolk, South-West asked whether self-employed farmers were covered by the Regulations. I regret to say that they are not. The 1956 Act, under which the Regulations are made, provides powers for the protection of workers only. Nevertheless, we hope that self-employed farmers will consider themselves covered by the Regulations and will implement them for their own safety. We hope that the self-employed farmer will provide himself with this type of cab, just as he takes out insurance to protect himself in other ways.

I was grateful for the remarks of the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, West (Mr. James Davidson). I have made a note of his suggestion, although he will not expect me to say that it could be done. I assure him that I will look into what he suggested to see if it is a possibility.

The hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor), who has not, I believe taken part in an agricultural debate before, but whom we welcome, asked about accidents and the information which was required. We are aware of the need for action. The hon. Gentleman will realise that accidents to non-insured persons are not recorded by the Ministry of Social Security. This leads to a weakness in our records, but we are trying to improve them, and if possible we shall make them available to the House and the country.

I should like to convey the thanks of the Minister and the Department to all hon. Gentlemen for their support over these Regulations. With all their defects—if some appear in the working, we can put them right—we are today taking the first real practical steps to prevent these appalling deaths as a result of overturning tractors.

Mr. Loveys

The hon. Gentleman answered the debate comprehensively, but did not touch on the difficult question of new tractors bought for work for which they would be exempted under the Regulations. Is it essential for them to be fitted with these cabs?

Mr. Hoy

I replied fully to the hon. Gentleman. I said that there was a great difficulty because the retailer had no guarantee that the tractor would not be used for certain purposes and the farmer could not honestly say that he would never use it for them.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That the Agriculture (Tractor Cabs) Regulations 1967, a draft of which was laid before this House on 31st May, be approved.