§ 2.42 p.m.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether in the interests of public safety, they keep a register of tips upon which, or into which, toxic wastes are poured or deposited and what precautions are taken to prevent the death of lorry drivers or others, who unwittingly may have to transport highly toxic liquids or materials.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, DEPARTMENT of the ENVIRONMENT (Baroness Birk)My Lords, under the Deposit of Poisonous Wastes Act 1972 the deposit of toxic wastes has to be reported to local waste disposal authorities. As waste disposal is a local authority function, no central record is maintained. It is an offence to dispose of toxic waste in a way which creates an environmental hazard. Controls will be extended by the Control of Pollution Act and from 1st April the Health and Safety at Work Act will apply at waste disposal sites and also to workers transporting materials to them.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that Answer, may I ask whether she is aware that I have read both the Deposit of Poisonous Wastes Act and the Control of Pollution Act and that, having looked at the penalties therein for a breach of the regulations, I believe they are completely out of proportion to the importance of the offence when toxic wastes are deposited? Finally, may I 967 ask my noble friend whether any further action has been taken on the Press notice which was distributed last October regarding the establishment at Warren Springs Laboratory, Stevenage, of a waste materials exchange, and what progress has been made in making a register, as was then suggested after the distribution to firms of some 25,000 to 30,000 leaflets? What steps have been taken to make a central register of these noxious, poisonous and corrosive wastes which menace local populations, and, eventually, mankind?
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, so far as the penalties are concerned, I think my noble friend will agree that the relevant matter is to try to prevent tragic accidents such as that which occurred at Pitsea. As he rightly said, this has rather more to do with the Health and Safety at Work Act than the Control of Pollution Act. What happened here was that, although the Health and Safety at Work Act will not come into force until 1st April, the Department of Employment set up an investigation. It is also true that—apart from the fact that there will always be a measure of human error —when this Act is in force, the kind of accident which happened at Pitsea ought, one hopes, to be prevented.
So far as the establishment at Warren Springs and the register are concerned, I think that I shall have to ask my noble friend to write to me about that matter and I shall let him have the up-to-date facts. My recollection is that it is not strictly relevant to the terms of the Question, but I should like to let my noble friend have the information. So far as a register is concerned, this really would not meet the point which my noble friend is making. Some local authorities have taken on rights under local Acts, and Essex County Council is one which has done so. These councils can take action themselves. Under the Control of Pollution Act, this will extend to local authorities with no private Acts themselves and will also extend to the whole area. The keeping of a central register will not, I think, deal with the question in the way my noble friend wants.
Lord HATLSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, can the noble Baroness develop what she has said about the Pitsea investigation? What type of investigation is it to be? Are its 968 proceedings to be public? Will its Report be published? Will it simply be internal to the Department or will it be a public investigation of some kind?
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, as I understand it, the inquest has been adjourned and the results are awaited. Redland Purle, the firm concerned, is holding its own investigation and the Department of Employment has already set up an investigation. I cannot go any further than that at this moment, mainly because I do not know what is further contemplated and I shall be unable to comment until the results of the adjourned inquest are published.
§ Baroness PHILLIPSMy Lords, can my noble friend tell us whether very strict measures are taken at the point where the waste is deposited?—because many of us have been told of waste dumped on ordinary refuse tips which is not ostensibly toxic but which contains this type of material.
§ Baroness BIRKYes, my Lords, there has been up to now—this is controlled by the local authorities. But nevertheless when the Health and Safety at Work Act comes into operation, the controls both on employers and employees will be very much stronger. Furthermore, when the Control of Pollution Act becomes implemented, this again will reinforce all the points my noble friend has raised.
Viscount ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, can the noble Baroness reassure me in regard to one word in my noble friend's Question which frightens me rather badly? He talks about drivers "unwittingly" having to transport highly toxic liquids and materials. Is there a possibility that drivers can be taking this material around not knowing what they are carrying? Is the knowledge of what they are carrying given not only to those drivers but to other people concerned in the matter—the road authority and the rest—so that they will know what is in these big tankers and thus, if something goes badly wrong, something can be done about it, and the drivers themselves protected?
§ Baroness BIRKYes, my Lords. At the present moment this matter should be covered both by the operators and the local authorities responsible for the tips. But the point about the Health and Safety 969 at Work Act is that it will make reinforcement very much stronger indeed. The point is not, I think, that the driver should necessarily know the very technical contents of what he is is carrying, but that he should know exactly what he should do with it, and there should be control at the tip. These matters will also be the subject of the investigation.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, finally—not to try the patience of the House—
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Shepherd)And mine!
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEK—and the patience of the Leader of the House, may I ask one more supplementary question? Is my noble friend aware that some people consider that the accident at Pitsea was nothing more than an
incident that has no wider significance than an accident at work"?Is my noble friend aware that that kind of attitude is one that we deprecate, and one that is not conducive to a healthy nation, or to a decent Britain?
§ Baroness BIRKYes, my Lords, I also read the piece in the Economist, but it went on to say:
… and that means plenty.The point being made was that this was a question of an accident at work as contrasted with an environmental hazard. I do not think for one moment that it detracts from the tragedy of the whole accident. One only hopes that because of this accident more precautions and restrictions will follow in the future.