§ Lord AUCKLANDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government how many deaths attributable to asbestosis have been reported to them during the past five years, and what current steps are being taken to eradicate this dreadful disease.
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, until last year figures of claims for industrial injuries death benefit for asbestosis were not separately collected, but it is estimated that about 80 deaths a year are accepted as due to or materially accelerated by asbestosis. In about 30 cases a year asbestosis is registered as the primary cause of death. New and more comprehensive regulations were introduced in 1970. These apply to all factory and construction sites where people might be exposed to asbestos dust. These require factory occupiers and contractors to take stringent precautions to safeguard their workpeople. The Employment Medical Advisory Service of the Health and Safety Executive is undertaking a long-term survey to monitor the health of asbestos workers. Details of the survey were given in the reply of my noble friend Lord Hughes to a Question from the noble Lord, Lord Hale, on 26th November 1974.
§ Lord AUCKLANDMy Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for that Answer? Will he agree that it constitutes a very disturbing situation, and may I ask him whether he saw, or has had his attention drawn to, the recent television programme on this subject which showed some very harrowing and dreadful scenes? May I also ask the noble Lord whether the Factory Inspectorate are doing sufficient to ensure safety precautions? May I ask also whether the compulsory wearing of masks in the more dangerous processes is being followed sufficiently? Finally, may I ask whether the Medical Research Council and the medical profession in general are making sufficient studies of one of the most terrible diseases of our time?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, I am aware of the television programme to 867 which the noble Lord referred. I under-stand that the incidents to which reference was made took place before we had the new regulations, and before we had adequate instruments for measuring dust. I can tell the noble Lord that I am very satisfied with the standards as they are at the moment. May I first direct his attention to an article in The Times on 20th January 1975 by the Editor of the Times Business News, who commented most favourably upon the standards in this country. Furthermore, he com-mended them to the ILO for enforcement by governments throughout the world.
Secondly, may I say that we are following up the work that has been done in recent years with the same sense of urgency as we have had over the last few years. At the present time, the Medical Research Council is reviewing the information on which our present standards have been established. This is in addition to the survey and the monitoring of workers' health which has been undertaken by the Employment Medical Advisory Service, and that service will be publishing interim reports from time to time. I believe that we are doing all we can, and we are observing a very high standard.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that during the period in which I had the honour to serve in the Ministry of Social Security when we raised this issue of asbestos, the trade union movement and other industrial organisations were vigilant about this growing menace of asbestosis, and they particularly asked that there should be an extension of and greater recruitment to the Factory Inspectorate. Has that inspectorate been increased and how do we recruit to it?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for having asked that question, because I should like to say a word on enforcement. There are 1,200 factories that are affected by the regulations, but in some cases only one or two workers work in an area where there is asbestos dust. The inspectors visit these factories at least once a year, and where there is any difficulty they make repeated visits at short intervals. The inspectors have instruments 868 which enable them to take accurate measurements of dust on all their visits. They have instructions that where there is any significant breach of regulations, they should not hesitate to prosecute and since the new regulations have been in force there have been 42 cases success-fully brought to court. There has been one case where production has been prohibited, and in a second case a prohibition order has been served. In addition, the Industrial Hygiene Unit carries out a number of extensive programme visits to take more detailed measurements, and to give specialised advice. Here, again, I believe that the enforcement matches the high standards which we observe.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord who leads this House, whether, while this is an extremely important and interesting matter, his observations about the shortness of questions apply equally to the brevity of answers?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, in all honesty I believe so.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, while this excellent consideration is going on in regard to this extremely important question, can the noble Lord say whether the Government propose, having very properly made more ample special provision for sufferers from coalminers' pneumoconiosis, to make similar additional provision for sufferers from asbestosis and byssinosis?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, I believe that that is another question, and if it were on the Order Paper I am sure it would be answered.
§ Lord PEDDIEMy Lords, in view of my noble friend's comment that inspectors make visits at least once a year, can he give any indication as to whether there is any means of continuing the monitoring of dust in the factories?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, it is the normal practice of the inspector to set up a system in the factory whereby there is continuous monitoring by the management.