HC Deb 06 December 1985 vol 88 cc588-97 1.46 pm
Mr. Gareth Wardell (Gower)

I beg to move, That this House notes with concern the increased numbers of domestic fires and accidents caused by defective electrical wiring and the misuse of electricity; notes the cost of this increase in terms of human tragedy and finance; and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to include the electrical re-wiring of homes in the criteria for all home improvement grants, and to make available grant aid for the re-wiring of older properties, to bring forward long-promised legislation regarding the safety and availability of electrical fittings and appliances, to establish nationally agreed and recognised standards of competence for electricians, and to ensure that all children are properly educated in the use and mis-use of electricity.

I am grateful for the opportunity to draw attention to the fact that, despite the valuable contribution that it makes to modern living, electricity has become an increasingly large factor in household fires. Of all fires reported in 1950, about 7,000 were identified as having an electrical source. By 1970, 17,000 fires were so identified. That represents an increase of 10,000 in 20 years. Only a decade later, in 1980, 35,000 fires were identified as having an electrical source.

A moment's reflection to consider how rapidly the use of electricity and electrical appliances expanded in households during the 20 years between 1950 and 1970, and the improved safety standards of appliances in the latter part of that period, highlights and puts into perspective an increase in electrical fires of about 17,000 a year by 1980. According to Home Office figures, almost 50 per cent. of domestic fires started by accident are caused by household electrical equipment. In 1983, 173 people died and 2,268 people were injured, sometimes grotesquely, in such household fires—tragedies compounded by our knowledge that almost all those deaths and injuries could have been avoided if the proper measures of care, maintenance and use of electrics in the home had been carried out.

If it is necessary to make a point by putting a measurable cost on the problem, I should tell the House that, in 1950, fire losses cost Britain £20 million. In 1970, losses were £110 million, and in the five years from 1975 to 1980 costs increased from £225 million to £470 million.

There is no doubt that the public are often complacent about and, indeed, unaware of the dangers of some of their practices with regard to electricity. During the past few weeks I have consulted the chief fire officer of the county of west Glamorgan and representatives of the South Wales electricity board, who told me hair-raising stories about apparently widespread bad practices by consumers. Quite apart from practices such as electric fires and hair dryers being used in bathrooms, there are examples of steam irons and televisions running at the same time from a flex connected to light fittings. Wall sockets hang from the wall because the plaster is so wet from damp that the socket cannot be firmly fixed. Electric heaters are completely covered with dripping wet clothes to dry them faster. People break into the main electricity supply to make adaptations to defraud the electricity boards—the famous black box is one of those items.

How often has one seen the Christmas tree syndrome of adaptors being plugged into adaptors and a mass of electrical connections being concentrated on one point? The problem that this can create is extremely serious, for it is often not realised by the consumer that his socket outlet is designed only to operate on a maximum of 13 amps and with the use of adaptors it is all too easy to overload the unit by use of high-rating products at the same time. Not the least of the serious problems created is that of over-heating, which can take place at the socket and thus provide a potential fire risk.

Another factor that is not appreciated is the way that an adaptor assembly can cause a weakening of contact pressure, leading to intermittent contact. This can again lead to overheating and the possible risk of damage to lighting and property. It amazes me that people in Britain today can be so foolish when they are dealing with such a dangerous element as electricity.

There is a need for a public education programme. The Association of British Insurers, with which I have been in contact, has a keen interest in this debate and has sent me samples of the leaflets that it produces and distributes as part of its public service activities, and I commend that work. I should like to see its excellent leaflet "It can happen to you" distributed on an annual basis by all insurance companies and agents to each householder with home insurance renewal notices.

I should also like electricity boards to send out home safety literature with quarterly bills to every electricity consumer. They should organise inter-school competitions geared to electrics and home safety. It is surely not beyond the wit of our school system to ensure that, before leaving our institutions of learning, all children know how to change a fuse safely and how to connect a plug and the basic do's and don'ts of using electricity in the home. Such lessons would take perhaps one dozen sessions in the general, consumer studies or domestic science curriculums and a small section of an examination paper at the end of term could serve a useful purpose.

Much of the teaching material is readily available from institutions such as the Association of British Insurers and the Fire Protection Association. The former has also produced an excellent video called "Nobody told me" which is available free to organisations, as are the electricity boards' leaflets and those of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. I am sure that county officers, as in my county of West Glamorgan, will be happy to advise teachers on facts to cover and material available to use. However, this effort needs to be co-ordinated so that all the organisations that I have mentioned, as well as the Electricity Council, Government Departments such as the Home Office and the Department of Education and Science, insurance companies and chief fire officers work together.

I very much welcome the Home Office decision to mount a major publicity campaign in 1985 on the theme of action to be taken in the event of fire in the home. I hope that a campaign of this kind, on a co-ordinated basis, will be carried out in the future.

Apart from the much-needed sharpening of a public education campaign, the Government could actively encourage and promote safety by means of home improvment grants for defective wiring. This is a major cause of electrical faults and fires. There were 2,350 fires in 1983 that could be attributed directly to the permanent wiring system. This problem is particularly acute in properties that were built and wired more than 30 years ago before the widespread use of plastic-coated wires. Such wiring was sheathed in rubber or it was leadcoated. Both materials become brittle with age, which leads to cracking and to the potential uncovering Of wires.

Older properties also have insufficient electrical point outlets. In a real sense these properties are sub-standard in terms of safety for modern living, yet no provision is made in the home improvement grants criteria for rewiring. The condition and safety standards of the electrical wiring system of a house are of as much importance as the height of the ceiling or the size of the windows. They should therefore be included as part of the improvement work that is eligible for grant aid.

Local authorities have faced this problem for a long time. When they carry out adaptations for the elderly or disabled—chairlifts on stairs, or the installation of showers and central heating systems—councils find that the work cannot be completed safely in older properties because the old electrical wiring is unable to cope safely with the improvements. Rewiring, therefore, is the only option. Although grants are available for showers or chairlifts, they are not available for the necessary rewiring. This poses a dilemma for councils. Are they to adopt the solution that people in older houses cannot have the convenience and help of modern aids? Of course not. Councils therefore pay for rewiring. But this means either that money is diverted from other parts of their budgets at a time of financial stringency and limitations or that fewer adaptations are carried out because of the limited budget.

The 1961 Parker Morris report is completely out of date and does little to meet the requirements of the modern household. The growth in the number of domestic electrical appliances shows clearly the need for better facilities in the interests of safety and flexibility for householders. It is important to point out that, although many organisations have considered updating the Parker Morris report of 1961 and have issued their own reports, the recommendations relating to the Parker Morris standards have not been implemented. It is left to individual designers to indicate what they believe to be the immediate and future demands of the potential householder. That anomaly needs to be remedied.

It is inevitable that if there is no convenient socket where the consumer wishes to place his appliance he will take steps to overcome the problem. That could well mean lengthening the flex by a crude do-it-yourself extension or even trying to do something such as feeding two appliances from one plug. Whatever he does, there is always a chance that it will not be done in such a way as to avoid a potentially dangerous electrical situation. In particular, it is most important that it does not involve a loss of earthing at the point where it is vital.

In an article that was printed in the journal of the Faculty of Architects and Surveyors, the director of external relations of M. K. Electric Limited, Mr. J. J. Fallon, said: If longer flexes are provided there is the serious risk of there being a hazard, particularly to the elderly. Falls are a common cause of accidents in the home and are much more serious to our senior citizens. In statistics it must be admitted, such accidents are not considered as being due to electrical matters and thus it is difficult to indicate just how serious the problem really is but there is a general consensus it does make a substantial contribution to the nature of accidents in this area. Certainly no one can quarrel with the hazardous situation which can be created by the unauthorised flex connections placed under a carpet and subject to continuous traffic over them; it can only lead to a potentially hazardous situation.

There are other equally positive ways in which the Government can assist in solving the problem. For example, in July 1984 the Government published a White Paper on the safety of goods, which, if implemented, would do much to reduce the availability of cheap imports of electrical appliances with unsatisfactory safety standards. I understand that no firm date for implementing the proposals in that White Paper has yet been considered.

On 8 October 1984 the Department of Trade and Industry issued a press notice saying that the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central (Mr. Fletcher) was to remove substandard electric plugs from the United Kingdom market. The notice said that new safety regulations covering plugs and sockets would, it was hoped, be introduced by the Minister in Parliament early next year. The year was 1985. In March this year the Sunday Telegraph reported that the draft regulations were expected to be published shortly—one of the words most often used by the Government along with the word "soon". Since then, over a year since the first announcement, nothing has been done. I am sure that the House will want the Government to implement those proposals as soon as practicable, and I hope that they will do so.

The Government could also follow the example of many European countries and Australia in making the installation of an approved residual current circuit breaker mandatory in British homes. The first step in that direction could be the mandatory fitting of such a circuit breaker in new homes.

The local consultant for engineering services, fire and accident investigation in Swansea, Mr. Alan Jones, calls the rewirable fuse the damnable, notorious rewirable fuse. He says that the fuse is like the brakes to a car. It is the fuse that limits energy dissipation, or so it should, but these fuses… are no longer functioning properly. The biggest problem with a rewirable fuse of course is that it can be rewired with anything by anyone. A 30 amp fuse will take 100 amps for three minutes before it eventually blows. It means sufficient energy is discharged at the source of the fault to ignite associated combustible materials. After a fuse has blown a number of times, we have large carbon deposits on the asbestos sleeve together with copper globules which impregnate the lining. So in fact eventually the fuse does not blow at all, and will conduct electricity without any fuse wire in it. At that point we have lost our electrical breaks, effectively we are driving without breaks, so if you see an article and it says, `The fire was due to a short circuit', it is wrong, it is not due to a short circuit, the fire was due to the fact that the protective device back at the distribution board did not clear the fault quick enough. If you see a statement saying 'the fire was due to cable overheating', it is singularly and profoundly incorrect. The fire occurred because the rating of the fuse did not tie up with the rating of the cable. I suppose a useful analogy would be this. If a lorry loses its brakes, careers down a hill and kills 5 people at the bottom it would not be true to say that the accident happened because the lorry was travelling too fast, surely the true cause of the accident was the brakes failing.

Certainly Mr. Jones, with his expertise as a consultant engineering contractor, makes it clear that a great step forward would be the fitting of the mandatory, residual, current circuit breaker.

Action is also required to stop the way in which almost anyone can set up as an electrician. There are no nationally recognised formal qualifications for an electrician before he can give himself that title. Perhaps the Manpower Services Commission could organise a formal training course with an approved qualification. Judging by the evidence, many do-it-yourselfers and handymen, on finding themselves unemployed, have set up as electricians. Therefore, such a course would be popular and to the national advantage.

I hope that in proposing the motion today I have at least pointed to a number of serious problems with electricity. Government action is required to promote greater awareness along the lines of the Home Office initiative to which I referred. In addition, the rewiring of older properties should be included in home improvement grants. It should be mandatory that all electricians who rewire properties should be on the register of electricians.

If such measures were implemented, far fewer tragedies would occur, and far less money would be lost, in properties that are at risk because simple precautions have not been taken.

2.10 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Michael Howard)

I welcome this opportunity of speaking on the important subject of electrical safety in the home, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Gower (Mr. Wardell) on his good fortune in the ballot, on his choice of subject and on the extensive research that he has carried out in support of the arguments that he adduced.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I am responsible for consumer safety. I shall talk about that aspect first, before going on to answer in detail the points raised. The consumer safety unit at the Department of Trade and Industry, for which I am responsible, deals with all aspects of consumer safety and is concerned with the safety of most goods sold in the shops. The main exceptions are food, pharmaceuticals and cars, for which responsibility lies elsewhere.

At this time of year there is particular interest in the safety of toys, and I hope to put out a Christmas message to shoppers drawing attention to the need to think carefully about the safety of toys before they buy. I see my job as one of making sure that the ordinary consumer is not endangered by the goods he buys, and I shall pursue as vigorously as I am able the minority of unscrupulous suppliers who are not concerned or as careful as they should be about the goods they put on sale.

I have at my disposal powers under the Consumer Safety Act 1978, including the power to issue prohibition orders to stop the sale of dangerous goods that come to my notice. I shall not hesitate to use those powers if I deem it necessary.

The home accident surveillance system, which was set up on 1976, has proved particularly useful in pinpointing those areas of consumer safety which need particular attention. The surveillance system is a rotating sample of hospitals located throughout England and Wales gathering details of accidents involving consumer products. Details are collected centrally and processed by a computer in my Department.

All the information from the system is widely disseminated, including to manufacturers and consumer groups, but the main purpose is to help the Government identify priorities in consumer safety. So successful has the system proved that the European Community is considering the adoption of similar systems for use throughout the Community countries, and we are encouraging the Community in that regard. The pace of change in consumer safety is every bit as great as in other fields. We are currently preparing fresh legislation to protect the consumer.

On the electrical side, we are taking positive measures to make safer environment for ordinary people. We are drafting new regulations to outlaw the kind of substandard plugs and adaptors that were being imported in recent times and caused disquiet among safety experts. I shall expand on this later and explain why the measures have not been forthcoming as speedily as the hon. Gentleman, I and many others would have liked.

Concern has also been shown about cookers that get too hot on the non-functional outside surfaces. We are taking action on that. New regulations are being drawn up to set limits to the temperatures that can be reached on the outside surfaces of cookers.

We shall be introducing the Goods and Services Bill to the House as soon as parliamentary time permits. This will close loopholes in the existing law and give powers of seizure to trading standards officers of local authorities who enforce safety legislation.

In the longer term, we have plans for dealing with other safety problems. Perhaps the chief among these arise from secondhand goods. Legislation already exists—the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations—to stop the sale of dangerous secondhand electrical products. We will do everything possible to encourage trading standards officers to enforce the law. There is, however, no similar legislation to stop the sale of unsafe new and secondhand gas appliances, although the law already prohibits their installation. We are, therefore, carefully investigating the possibility of drawing up new regulations to outlaw the sale of dangerous gas appliances.

Many of the points that the hon. Gentleman raised are the responsibility of my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy and of my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing, Urban Affairs and Construction. However, I shall do my best to answer them.

The hon. Gentleman draws attention in his motion, and he did so also in his remarks, to the increased numbers of domestic fires and accidents caused by defective electrical wiring and the misuse of electricity. If we examine the statistics on these accidents we find that the consequences were somewhat different from those that were cited by the hon. Gentleman. The figures held by my Department and the Home Office show a steady decrease in the number of electrocutions and no discernible increase in the number of fires recorded as being ignited by electrical wiring over the past five or six years.

I shall send a copy of the statistics to the hon. Gentleman, but the essence of them in summary is that the number of fatalities per year in the home due to electrical causes has been falling over the past 15 years or so. In 1970-71, there were 75 deaths, while in 1984-85 there were 38. This fall is extremely encouraging, particularly when it is realised that the consumption of electricity has increased by about 20 per cent. during that same period and the number of electricity consumers has increased by 18 per cent. The number and complexity of the household appliances in use has also grown at an astonishing rate. Every death of this kind is a death too many, and we must continue to do all that we can to reduce the number still further, but we can, I think, derive some encouragement from the trend to which I have referred. The numbers that I have given cover deaths from all sources of electricity in the home, including appliances.

The hon. Gentleman is concerned especially about household wiring—he used the term "fixed wiring" during his observations. Fixed wiring does not give rise to a large number of accidents. Deaths attributable to fixed wiring in the home run at rather fewer than three a year. The reason is, no doubt, because fixed wiring is hidden and therefore less accessible. Also, it is not an area where the unqualified person would normally venture.

Technical standards for household wiring are laid down in regulations prepared by the Institution of Electrical Engineers and are regularly revised and kept up to date, the most recent edition being produced in 1981. They are concerned with the design, selection, erection, inspection and testing of electrical installations in and about buildings generally. When these regulations are complied with, as is the case with all reputable electricians, the risk to the consumer from the fixed wiring is negligible. The document includes one part devoted to "Protection for Safety", which is divided into chapters which, among other things, deal specifically with protection against electric shock, thermal effects and overcurrent. However, the regulations are voluntary and not mandatory. Some firms may offer a cheap installation by cutting corners and not complying with the IEE regulations. This raises the question of how the consumer can be protected against bad installation.

The National Inspection Council for Electrical Installation Contracting has been formed specifically to set and maintain the required standard in fixed household wiring. It is a non-profit making organisation, registered as a charity, which was set up in 1956 by concerted action of all sections of the electrical industry. Its aim is to protect the consumer against faulty, unsafe and defective electrical installations. It has a roll of approved contractors containing nearly 10,000 names and addresses of firms which will work to the standards laid down in the IEE regulations.

All contractors who apply for council approval must sign an undertaking that they are prepared to ensure that all their work will conform to the required standard. One of the council's inspecting engineers then inspects their business premises, staff qualifications, equipment, and a representative selection of their work. Those that pass the examination are accepted as approved contractors on the roll and are then subjected to periodic re-inspection to ensure that standards are maintained. All complaints about the workmanship of approved contractors are investigated.

That is an excellent example of an industry regulating itself in order to maintain standards, service to the public and, above all, safety. The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that the chief engineering inspector of the Department of Energy acts as an observer on the governing board of the council.

There are always risks when unqualified people carry out wiring work. Accidents resulting from household wiring are reported via the electricity boards to my hon. Friend the Parliamentay Under-Secretary for Energy.

Accidents stem from a wide variety of simple slips. The earth connection may be missing to a socket, or the wrong size wiring or fuse may be used. Each may lead to a tragic accident or to a fire. Education—as in so many other things—is the key, and many bodies are involved in the education process. I shall deal with that in more detail, but I would refer here to the excellent publications of the electricity area boards and of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. These bodies stress the dangers from do-it-yourself work and the need to employ a qualified and registered contractor to undertake wiring work. They urge consumers to have periodic checks on the wiring system, which are normally simple and cheap.

I welcome the tribute paid by the hon. Gentleman to the work of the Association of British Insurers. I am sure that it will note the point that he made about the possibility of sending out its leaflet with renewal documents. I also welcome the tribute that he paid to the Home Office publicity campaign on the action to be taken in the case of fire in the home.

The hon. Gentleman proposes that nationally agreed and recognised standards of competence for electricians should be set. The Government see no advantage here over the standards imposed by the IEE regulations and the policing of work which the National Inspection Council for Electrical Installation Contracting undertakes. The question of Government supervision in this area has been raised on a number of occasions. It is the Government's view that any such control system would duplicate the work undertaken voluntarily by the national council. This would be expensive and out of proportion to the risk, even if Government supervision could improve safety standards over those that already exist. We are, therefore, unwilling to create the additional bureaucracy which would be required.

On the question whether grant should be available for the rewiring of older properties, I refer the hon. Gentleman to the joint circular issued by the Department of the Environment and the Welsh Office on 8 December 1980. This makes it clear that the renewal of existing electrical wiring is normally regarded as replacement, and should not, in the opinion of my right hon. Friends, attract improvement grant unless it is carried out in conjuction with other improvements and accepted by the local authority as necessary to enable the dwelling to reach the relevant standard. The installation of electic wiring as a power supply for the first time may properly be regarded as an improvement.

The present position is clear. Rewiring in itself does not attract grant, but where it makes sense to do so as part of a wider scheme of improvement, and provided the property is otherwise eligible, the work can attract grant. This must be right. The first priority of the improvement grant system is to bring properties in poor general condition up to an acceptable standard. Local authorities, at whose discretion such grants are awarded, should not direct their attention to what is on most judgments a less pressing issue.

As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Government's proposals on the reform of home improvement policy were published as a Green Paper earlier this year. My right hon. Friends are currently considering the many responses that have been received following consultations, including a number seeking the inclusion of electrical rewiring in the proposed fitness standard.

The Green Paper itself proposes that satisfactory electric wiring should be included in the standard in which a dwelling should be expected to be after discretionary assistance has been paid. I assure the hon. Gentleman that this and other representations which my right hon. Friends have received will be considered very carefully.

The hon. Gentleman called upon the Government to bring forward the admittedly long promised legislation on the safety of electrical fittings and appliances. This we are doing. In the light of what was said about the matter on previous occasions, I realise that I may be on somewhat delicate ground in giving assurances that we intend to introduce the regulations in the near future, but we intend soon—and I mean soon—to introduce to the House two new sets of regulations, the plug and socket safety regulations, and the surface temperature regulations. They should go a long way towards dealing with some of the main complaints from consumers about the safety and quality of electrical products in shops.

I should like to say why we have not been able to bring the regulations before the House as speedily as we should have liked to do. It is because the consultations in which we have been engaged have been more extensive and more lengthy than expected. There are obviously clear advantages, in a matter of this kind, in proceeding with the general consent of those concerned, including the industry. It is because we are anxious to bring the industry with us in the measures that we have consulted so extensively and thoroughly. That is what led to the delay. I hope that it will be possible to bring the regulations before the House before much of the new year has passed.

In addition, as soon as parliamentary time permits, I shall be introducing to the House the Goods and Services Bill. This, as the hon. Gentleman recognised, will close existing loopholes in the safety legislation and give powers of seizure of unsafe goods to the trading standards officers of local authorities, who enforce the legislation.

Electrical equipment presents all of us with special considerations regarding safety. Electrical appliances are vital to the running of our homes, offices and factories, and yet are a potential source of real danger. I have already given the latest figures that we have on those who died in the home as a consequence of accidents arising from this cause in 1984-85. The last complete year for which figures are available is 1983, when 44 people were electrocuted in or around the home. Although that figure, as I have indicated, has not increased in recent years, despite the increasing use of mains powered appliances, it is still too high.

I know that my ministerial predecessors have given considerable thought to ways of reducing hazards from electrical appliances. I know that responsible manufacturers do their best to ensure that the public are protected from buying dangerous electrical accessories. However, as some hon. Members know., unscrupulous suppliers have been selling poor quality plugs and sockets which are often dangerous. The public are rightly concerned about the safety of these products, arid new regulations are now clearly needed to control these goods. The new regulations for electric plugs, sockets, adaptors and related items, such as fuses for 13-amp plugs, which will be introduced early next year, will require these products to comply with British standards, and we hope to introduce an approval scheme, at least for 13-amp plugs.

I know that some United Kingdom manufacturers still have reservations about an approval scheme, but there seems no other effective way of preventing dangerous 13-amp plugs—particularly those from the far east—from reaching the market place. It is at present all too easy for unprincipled importers to mark their goods as complying with British standards when in fact they do not comply. Genuine certification from a nominated testing body must be required of anyone wishing to market 13-amp plugs. I know that my officials have been discussing special arrangements with United Kingdom manufacturers to overcome any problems that might arise, and I am confident that an approval scheme, or its equivalent, can be set up which is acceptable to all concerned. I emphasis again how anxious I am that it should, if at all possible, be acceptable to all concerned. We shall do everything that we can to satisfy any reasonable apprehensions that may be expressed during the consultation period.

In dealing with the question of imported goods of this kind—I may be anticipating, but it is a convenient way to bring my remarks to a close—I should like to refer to the subject which will be raised on the Adjournment on Monday evening by my hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Gregory), when he will deal with imports of dangerous consumer goods. I look forward to returning to that aspect of the subject in replying to my hon. Friend on Monday evening.

I conclude by repeating the congratulations that I expressed earlier to the hon. Member for Gower—

It being half-past Two o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.

    c597
  1. AGRICULTURE 33 words
  2. c597
  3. SOCIAL SERVICES 34 words
  4. c597
  5. ENERGY 25 words
  6. c597
  7. EMPLOYMENT 25 words
Forward to