HL Deb 08 May 1961 vol 231 cc19-27

3.25 p.m.

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

LORD AUCKLAND

My Lords, I rise to move the Second Reading of the Home Safety Bill. The honourable gentleman the Member for Folkestone moved this Bill in another place, and it passed through all its stages without opposition and with the full support of all Parties. Your Lordships will remember that three weeks ago I myself initiated in this House a debate on home safety.

This Bill, as your Lordships will observe, is a very brief Bill. The most important part of it is Clause 1 (3) which says: There shall be defrayed out of moneys provided by Parliament any increase attributable to the foregoing provisions of this section in the sums payable out of moneys so provided by way of Rate-deficiency Grant or Exchequer Equalisation Grant under the enactments relating to local government in England and Wales or in Scotland. Your Lordships will doubtless be aware that, under Section 28 of the National Health Service Act, 1946, county councils and county borough councils now have power to form home safety committees. This Bill enables non-county boroughs, metropolitan boroughs and urban and rural councils, to do likewise. In the case of Folkestone, the cost has been very little: it works out at approximately one penny per person per head per year. Eastbourne, which is a county borough, last year expended something like £130 on this scheme, and I do not think there is any danger of local authorities going on a kind of spending spree on this account. My local home accident prevention committee at Leather-head is carrying out excellent work, and we are hoping this autumn to run a scheme, together with film shows, to bring this point to bear.

The idea of the Bill, as I see it, is to enable local authorities to bring home to the people the dangers and the tragedies of accidents in the home. At present many authorities are hampered by lack of funds, and I have already been in touch with such organisations as British Nylon Spinners, and they have undertaken to help in this connection. Some of your Lordships may have read last Monday's Daily Mirror, which was what they termed a "shock" issue on home safety. The front page of that day's issue will do more to bring home the menace and tragedy of accidents in the home than any speech, in your Lordships' House or elsewhere. It contained, as your Lordships may have seen, a picture of a small boy with one arm very nearly burnt off. There is also a supplement of pictures taken in Sweden showing a young child playing about with electrical plugs, electrical wiring, and other things which could cause fatal accidents.

Publicity is the answer to this problem of home safety, and this Bill does not embark on a large spending spree. Local authorities nowadays have a good deal of expenditure to undertake in respect of all their committees, and no ratepayer wants to find a large amount of money added to his rates. Nevertheless, safety in the home is something paramount. A person or a family who looks to safety in the home will look to safety on the road, which is another matter that has been, and is being, discussed in your Lordships' House. It is said that an Englishman's home is his castle. We do not want this turned into the morbid impression that art Englishman's home is his coffin, because more than 8,000 people die annually due to accidents in the home. This Bill, by enabling wider powers and financial aid to be given to more local authorities, will, it is hoped, cut this rate.

But, of course, in the long run it is the parents who must be made to realise their responsibilities. This Bill will help organisations who wish to show films and other propaganda to the kind of people who should see them, particularly young parents and those looking after the old people. After all, it is the old people who suffer most from these accidents, from falls due to bad lighting or badly laid linoleum, and so on. I would once again pay a very sincere tribute to the Daily Mirror for their edition to which I have referred. When I saw it I looked at it thoroughly; I then looked at it thoroughly again. I hope the pictures which it contains will receive the widest possible circulation. They are pictures not to be discarded; they are pictures to be looked at not once, not twice, but at least once a week for a very long period of time. If people should say, "It is too much bother to put a guard in front of my fire", they should then refer to these pictures and see what the result may be if the fire is not properly guarded, if the child is not properly supervised, or if the linoleum is not properly laid. As I have said, this Bill went through another place with the support of all Parties. I commend it to your Lordships and ask that it may be given a Second Reading. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2ª.—(Lord Auckland.)

3.33 p.m.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Auckland, is to be congratulated on having, by sponsoring this Bill, added to the good work he initiated in your Lordships' House a week or so ago by introducing the debate on safety in the home. As he has said, that debate made it quite clear that, in total of accidents:, and in total of fatal accidents, the home was more dangerous than almost any other place that could be mentioned. Certainly my noble friends and I fully support this Bill and will do all we can to expedite its progress. I hope that noble Lords opposite will do what they can to influence their friends in another place to ensure the speedy passage through its remaining stages of the Consumer Protection Bill, which is another extremely important matter in promoting safety in the home, and one that we should like to see on the Statute Book.

The Bill we are now discussing is an extremely useful little Bill, but it will remain so much waste paper unless the powers which it gives to local authorities are actively used and actively pursued. They are permitted to spend these very small sums of money and to have them grant-aided in the block grant; and those powers are all to the good. A good local authority will not want any prodding in this matter, particularly if they have someone on the council, or one of their officers, who is accident-conscious and takes the necessary steps in order to see that literature is distributed, films are shown, and an active voluntary home safety committee is set up. My fear, however, is that the less accident-conscious local authorities will not do anything at all about it. They will not have the excuse of cost, because the cost will be so small that it could not be weighed against a single accident in the home, certainly not against the loss of a single life. The only thing which worries me about the Bill is what steps are going to be taken to use it and to stimulate the local authorities into action.

The only central body we have—a very fine body—is the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. I hope that this Society will be very active in bringing this Bill, when it becomes an Act, to the notice of every local authority, showing very clearly what the powers are and what can be done, and taking such steps as are open to them to prompt and instigate the setting up of local home safety committees. If that is done, then this modest little Bill will be a very powerful instrument in reducing accidents in the home and will prove extremely well worth while.

When we had our debate a week or so ago I expressed the hope that the Home Secretary would see fit to add a small sum to the already small sum received from the Treasury by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents for this very kind of purpose. If it could have a few thousand pounds—and I mean literally a few thousand pounds; less than ten—for the promotion of this kind of work, that would have immense benefits and provide dividends of a kind the value of which it is impossible to compute. I hope that that suggestion will be adopted, and that the Royal Society will be able to pay for extra staff to contact local authorities and give the necessary advice and help, so that throughout the country our people will become accident-conscious, and will know the type of thing to avoid and the kind of stupidities giving rise to accidents. That is all that I need say, except to wish the Bill well and express the hope that its subsequent stages in your Lordships' House will be purely formal, so that after the next Royal Commission we may welcome it on to the Statute Book.

3.38 p.m.

LORD AMULREE

My Lords, I should like to say a few words in support of this Bill which the noble Lord, Lord Auckland, has introduced to your Lordships. The Bill refers to county districts and to the metropolitan boroughs. I take it that county and county borough councils have like powers under Section 28 (3) of the National Health Service Act, 1946. I agree very much with what the noble Lord said about the need for propaganda and publicity. I saw that Daily Mirror edition to whcih he referred, and I think they did very good work in producing those photographs. I remember that some time ago, when I introduced the Fireguards Bill into this House, I was greatly supported by a number of photographs sent to me from the Birmingham accident hospitals, which showed the terrible things that can occur to young children and old people when they get burned in a fire with no protection.

I am quite sure that a great deal of good can be done by showing films at appropriate places. I remember seeing one film which was made by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (or it may have been the Central Council for Health Education), which showed the kind of accidents that can occur to young children and babies in the normal house. It seemed to me to be a quite impressive film, which I am sure would go down well with women's institute meetings and gatherings of that sort. I should like to see a similar type of film showing what kinds of trouble can befall older people in their homes—such things as the danger of dark stairs, or torn carpets or linoleum; the danger of the trailing flex from a fire; and, what is quite a common danger, the fact that local authorities, or the gas and electric light authorities, tend to put meters at most inconvenient places, so that many people who are short in stature find that they have to climb on to a chair to look at the meter, which is an extremely difficult thing to do if you are not strong on your feet. One would like to see a film showing that kind of thing distributed widely through the country. Then I am sure that the housing authorities also will take interest in the Bill, because one way of reducing home accidents is to make housing as satisfactory as it possibly can be made, whether by reconditioning existing houses or by building new ones so that they do not lead to accidents in the home.

I share the view of the noble Lord Lord Stonham, that we do not like permissive legislation in regard to local authorities. As he rightly said, the good local authorities play their part and the bad ones do not move: the good do it anyway, and the bad require much more prodding. Therefore, one would rather see this as a matter of enforcement—that the local authorities must do it, rather than that they may. I trust that the publicity which this Bill is receiving now, plus the prodding from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (I should like to support what the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, said about giving this Society a little more money to do this work), will encourage the bad local authorities to do the work, and so relieve some of the terrible toll of accidents in the home. Not many people are killed in this way, but people receive serious injuries and require expensive and long treatment before they can be got on to their feet again. Therefore, I warmly support the noble Lord and his Bill.

3.43 p.m.

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (EARL BATHURST)

My Lords, I, too, should like to add my congratulations to the noble Lord who introduced this Bill, and also to his honourable friend in another place, for bringing the Bill before your Lordships. As usual, my noble friend has introduced this Bill in the charming, thoughtful and sincere manner for which he is becoming well-known in your Lordships' House. On behalf of Her Majesty's Government, I can only add that I echo all that he has said and wish his Bill well.

As the noble Lord has said, the smaller authorities who are not in themselves health authorities—namely, the non-country boroughs and the urban and rural districts—will now have the power to promote home safety by giving information and advice upon the prevention of accidents, and to contribute to the national and local voluntary organisations engaged in this work. The noble Lords, Lord Auckland, Lord Amulree and Lord Stonham have all mentioned the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. This Society is the fountainhead of national accident prevention, and I would echo the words of noble Lords, both this afternoon and in the debate initiated by the noble Lord a little while ago, congratulating the Society and welcoming all the work that it does for accident prevention.

There are many other associations who are engaged in the work of preventing accidents, but the material, the ideas and the propaganda with regard to accident prevention stem from the Royal Society. The noble Lord, Lord Amulree, has mentioned in particular film and film strips and other forms of propaganda. The Society has a library of such films, and now these smaller local authorities, and, with their support, other organisations, will be able to obtain these films and put them before meetings or gatherings to the best effect.

I must make it clear that the existing local health authorities already do valuable work in this sphere: for instance, with welfare clinics, health visitors, and other health services, all of which were mentioned in the debate the other day. The new powers in this Bill will in no way affect the work of these services, nor will this measure detract from the important work that they do. As the noble Lord, Lord Auckland, has said, his Bill provides the smaller authorities with a power which they have asked for; it is a job that they want to do and they will now be able to do it. When the Bill has passed through Parliament, as I hope it will, my right honourable friend will bring the provisions of the Bill to the attention of these authorities and will encourage them to make good use of their new powers. In part that is an answer to what the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, asked. I think it would not be right for me to say that my right honourable friend will wield a big stick towards local authorities. That is quite impossible; and no doubt it is improper to say, but I will say, from your Lordships' Dispatch Box, that I hope that the smaller local authorities will appreciate just what they can do at little, if any, extra expense. All that is needed is the enthusiasm of one or two of their own members.

The noble Lord, Lord Stonham, also asked that Her Majesty's Government do something about speeding up another Bill with which this Bill is tied. I can only say that I would recommend the noble Lord to read, as I suspect he has already done, the words of my honourable friend and colleague in another place; he will then see what he has said about the situation. Had I had the chance to call in upon my honourable friend and colleague this morning I should no doubt be in a position to tell your Lordships what he thinks about it, but unfortunately I was not able to do so. Nevertheless the Bill which the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, has mentioned will be before your Lordships shortly.

However, as the noble Lord, Lord Auckland, has said, it is not only legislation that can put accident-consciousness into the home. We cannot expect that this tragic toll of suffering can be reduced overnight by legislation alone. I should like to echo what the noble Lord has said with regard to the remarkable accident prevention publicity which was given in the Daily Mirror. I would also mention the work that has been done by the Readers' Digest in conjunction with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents; and I am most pleased to be able to add my tribute to that of the noble Lords, Lord Auckland and Lord Amulree, to those two papers.

I have already made some reference to the Consumer Protection Bill which Lord Stonham has mentioned. This Bill will be complementary to the one we are discussing now. The Consumer Protection Bill will ensure that goods are made as safe as possible before they go into the home, and the Bill which we are now discussing will help to educate people towards thinking how accidents may be prevented and whether the goods they buy are indeed safe. I am sure that noble Lords will agree with me that we need both these measures, and I have pleasure in commending this Bill to your Lordships and, again, in congratulating the noble Lord, and his honourable friend in another place, for bringing it before your Lordships.

3.50 p.m.

LORD AUCKLAND

My Lords, it only remains for me most sincerely to thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate. Both the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, and the noble Lord, Lord Amulree, gave some valuable advice which I am sure Her Majesty's Government have noted. I think that, so far as prodding local authorities is concerned, the local Members of Parliament probably play their part. Most local authorities, at any rate, I believe regard this matter of general safety as of paramount importance. Once again, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Bathurst, not only for his kind comments but for the great care which he has taken in the reply which he has given to the debate. I, for one, appreciate it fully. Finally, I would pay tribute to all organisations, manufacturing organisations, ROSPA and others who have given such valuable assistance to my right honourable friend the Member for Folkestone who moved the debate so admirably in another place. I ask your Lordships to give this Bill a Second Reading.

On Question, Bill read 2ª, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.