POWER TO MAKE CORRESPONDING PROVISION IN RELATION TO SHIPS (Hansard, 14 May 1976)

§ Mr. Andrew Bowden (Brighton, Kemp-town)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
The object of this clause is to bring ships into the Bill's provisions in certain conditions. I do not believe that any hon. Member would think that just because a food business happens to be afloat, it should be exempted from the terms and conditions of the Bill.
I apologise to the House for not bringing this proposition forward in Committee, but, unfortunately, it was a rather complicated clause to prepare and, despite the tremendous assistance I had in its preparation, it was not possible to have it ready in time for the Committee stage.
For the purposes of the Bill a ship means a home-going ship, which is, as I understand it, a ship proceeding towards our coast rather than moving away from it. The term "ship" also includes any boat or craft which is moored in any place and on or from which is carried on any catering business or retail food business. 854 The clause also includes the specific term "coastal excursions", and will apply to a ship on such an excursion even when it is moving away from our coast. However, it must be on a voyage, the total duration of which does not exceed 24 hours.
In many parts of the country there are various types of craft which are moored in various areas of water, including rivers, lakes, streams, and so on, from which some form of food business is run. This clause will ensure that they are included in the terms and conditions of the Bill.

§ Mr. Robert Adley (Christchurch and Lymington)
I have listened carefully to what my hon. Friend said. Presumably he is referring to ships which ply for hire and reward such as cross-Channel, or those which go from my constituency to Yarmouth on the Isle of Wight. It would be very helpful if he would make it clear that the new clause does not apply to naval vessels. As I understood it, none of the powers which the Bill will give to environmental health officers is applicable to Crown catering establishments, so presumably a ship does not include a vessel of the Royal Navy.
Would my hon. Friend consider, in view of the late hour at which this clause appears, ensuring that in another place words are inserted to make it clear beyond peradventure that the clause is aimed only at ships providing commercial catering facilities?
The hon. and learned Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Mr. Weitzman) reminded us that sometimes we did things here which had to be cleared up in the courts. I should not like to think that one of my constituents who has a boat which he uses regularly and for which he hires a crew—perhaps for only a nominal sum—would find that in so doing he was making his boat open to visits by environmental health officers to inspect the catering facilities. This is a small point, but I would be grateful if my hon. Friend could say more about it.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mr. Eric Deakins)
Perhaps I can deal with that point. The hon. Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley) 855 asked about boats plying for hire and reward and he mentioned commercial catering. It is clear from regulations already made, which carry the definition of "ships" which the hon. Member for Brighton, Kempton (Mr. Bowden) read out—Statutory Instrument 1172 of 1970—that a "ship" has to have on it a catering business or other retail food business. The word "business" imports a commercial undertaking. For that reason also the provision would not apply to naval vessels since they would not be engaged in the provision of a business as such.
I commend the clause to the House as useful. I share the apologies of the hon. Member for Kemptown for the fact that it has been introduced at a relatively late stage. One of the reasons for not introducing it in Committee was that we were trying as far as possible to follow the provisions of local Acts, and there is no reference to ships in local Acts. But as we are now having a measure for the country as a whole, we thought it appropriate to include this provision to bring the Bill, which is welcomed on both sides of the House, into line with the existing regulations which cover ships.

§ Mr. Richard Luce (Shoreham)
Since I represent a constituency with a port and harbour, and as the purpose of the Bill is to be as comprehensive as possible in terms of the number of food premises it covers, it seems to me that the new clause makes eminent sense, subject to the reassurance of the Under-Secretary of State about the criteria and the fact that it covers ships carrying on a business as such. I warmly support the new clause.

§ Mr. Bowden
I confirm and support what the Under-Secretary of State has said. Perhaps I did not make as clear as I should have done the fact that, under the terms of the new clause, it will be up to the Secretary of State to make the appropriate regulations. I felt that it would be better done in that way so that the Secretary of State can decide how and when he will apply regulations to deal with the situation.
My hon. Friend the Member for Shoreham (Mr. Luce) naturally has a great interest in ships and harbours and 856 their problems. I do not think that he owns a large vessel, but if he did and was out cruising with friends, and with perhaps his poor, hardworking wife in the galley, it is certain that her standards of hygiene would not reach down to the sort of level to which this measure applies, but they could in theory. But even if they did, the new clause would not in any way affect his craft or its operation. It is strictly limited to those ships, boats or craft on or from which a food business is carried on.

§ Mr. Adley
Earlier my hon. Friend used the term "home-going ship". I can understand the point if the ship is going from Newhaven to Dieppe, for example, but what happens if it is going from Lymington to Yarmouth? Both places are in the United Kingdom and are therefore within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom.

§ Mr. Bowden
In that case, the ship would be going from one part of home to another—perhaps rather like moving from the lounge to the dining room. If it is moving around our coasts it is covered.

§ Mr. Deakins
In the 1970 regulations, the definition of "coastal excursion" covers the point raised by the hon. Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley). A coastal excursion means a trip of not more than one day which starts and ends in Great Britain.