HC Deb 14 February 1997 vol 290 cc583-4

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Mr. Peter Atkinson (Hexham)

I welcome the Bill, but I should like to address a comment to my hon. Friend the Minister. When he draws up his guidance to chief constables on the workings of the legislation, he should deal with the question of police houses. As my hon. Friend knows, in rural areas of Northumberland we have police houses, which sometimes have a notice outside saying "Northumbria Constabulary". I want to be certain about the position of those who live in police houses in terms of whether they are on or off duty. If someone knocks on the door, are those living there deemed to be off duty or on duty? The Minister will be aware that officers who live in police houses are not necessarily posted to the area where those police houses are located. That may cause confusion. If my hon. Friend cannot give me an answer now, I should be grateful if he will consider the matter when he draws up the guidance.

Mr. Fabricant

This is the clause about which I have the gravest reservations. It states that a new subsection should be added to the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 stating that a person holding the office of constable is at work throughout the time when he is on duty, but not otherwise; and". In other words, when the officer is on duty it is then that those provisions should apply.

I understand that polls are never accurate, including political opinion polls, but I conducted a quick straw poll among the police at the Palace of Westminster. I was reassured to find out that the provisions will not apply to the Palace, but one police officer said that if they did he would go for early retirement. Another asked whether if someone attacked him with a broken bottle on which there was a little bit of dirt, he would have to walk away because he would otherwise be in breach of the health and safety regulations.

On a more serious note, in Police Review of 4 October a number of specific questions were asked by Alan Beckley about the difficulties which could arise if the provisions were made statutory. He wrote that those problems could include the lack of experience on which to base guidance to forces on how to make risk assessments for all aspects of police work (although generic risk assessments have been prepared) providing employees, including police officers, with a safe place to work advising officers who find themselves in life-threatening incidents on how to deal with the situation". He argued that that was not a practical thing to do under the terms of statutory regulation. Mr. Beckley also referred to the action officers should take when faced with danger (retreating or intervening?)"— and— the potential conflict between the operational independence of chief police officers and the powers of Health and Safety Executive inspectors That article reflects the concerns that have been expressed by police officers.

Those problems have not been properly addressed by the Bill. I hope that either my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Sir R. Whitney) or my hon. Friend the Minister will be able to reassure me and, indeed, the police officers at the Palace of Westminster who seem to feel so strongly about the matter.

Mr. Kirkhope

It is, of course, correct that clause 2 extends the definitions of "work" and "at work" in section 52 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. It provides that a constable is only to be regarded at work throughout the time when he is on duty. The effect of that is that the duties that the Act imposes upon employers to safeguard the health and safety of employees will not apply when a constable decides to exercise his constabulary powers at times when he is off duty. For example, he may be travelling home on the tube and see someone threatening another passenger with a knife or a gun. In the ensuing fight, the officer could be injured, and the question might arise as to whether he had been adequately protected under the health and safety regulations.

In such a case, where the officer is acting outside the immediate direction and the immediate control of his senior officers—it is a difficult area—it would be unreasonable for the chief officer to be liable under the 1974 Act. The clause simply makes that point clear. It certainly does not affect the officer's position in any way in relation to any other benefits and support to which he might be entitled.

I hope that that offers some reassurance to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire. It is important to remember that officers have a range of entitlements, benefits and assistance to deal with such matters. To make that assistance statutory and subject to the terms of the 1974 Act in the circumstances that I have described is regarded as unreasonable. I hope that my hon. Friend can accept that point.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 3 to 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, without amendment; read the Third time, and passed.

Back to