§ 3.40 p.m.
§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, before my noble friend Lord Oram repeats the Statement on asbestos being made by the Secretary of State in another place, it might be for the convenience of the House if I replied a little more fully to the Question put to me by the noble Baroness, Lady Vickers. I am sure the House will understand that reports by the Parliamentary Commissioner are made to the Member of Parliament who has raised the question, and the Ombudsman publishes reports from time to time. The publication of this particular report is not expected until 29th April. In the meantime, of course, my honourable friend the Member who raised the matter was given a copy of the report by the Ombudsman, and he made this available to the Press, which is why it appeared yesterday. There are no copies of that report; this is not under the control of the Government, but is a matter for the Parliamentary Commissioner and the individual Member concerned. Nevertheless, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State thought it right to make a statement today, and copies of that Statement will be available in the Printed Paper Office after it has been repeated to your Lordships by my noble friend Lord Oram.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, I wonder whether the noble Baroness will recall that the Ombudsman has two courses open to him and it is entirely a matter for him as to which course he takes One course is to report to Parliament on matters of importance, and the other is, as a matter of normal courtesy, to send a report to the Member who poses the question and asks for the inquiry to be made. The Parliamentary Commissioner decided to take the latter course.
I should like to say that when I approached the Parliamentary Commissioner about this first thing yesterday morning, I was received with the utmost courtesy and with every desire to help; and I was given an assurance that they were considering the problem. On the other hand, I promised a long time ago to send copies of this report to the Medical Officer of the European Economic Community, 1018 to the ILO and to the World Health Organisation. Really, it is no one's fault, but it is an impossible situation. It is only a 50-page report, and a large number of copies could easily be duplicated by the Ministry and made available. In view of the fact that I have a Question down for discussion immediately after the vacation and, I fancy, before the date stated for publication, this does become important.
§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, the whole House appreciates the particular interest which my noble friend has in this question, and for which I think we owe him a debt of gratitude. I am grateful for what he has said and for his understanding of the position. I think the report will be published on 29th April, which may be just before his debate—I will check on that—but in any case we are doing everything in our power to keep the House informed about this very important matter.
§ 3.44 p.m.
Lord ORAMMy Lords, with the leave of the House, I will now read a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Employment. The Statement is as follows:
"The Parliamentary Commissioner's report on his investigation into the enforcement of the Factories Act at Acre Mill, Hebden Bridge has given rise to serious public concern. Although the Parliamentary Commissioner recognised that responsibility for complying with the Factories Act and the Asbestos Regulations rested with the occupier of the factory, he made several criticisms of the action of my Department and of the Factory Inspectorate. These I accept.
"The Health and Safety Commission and its executive, of which the Factories Inspectorate is now a part, will study the report closely and, if anything still remains to be put right, this will be done.
"I would emphasise to the House that the report relates to the circumstances at Acre Mill between 1939 and 1970. The position has changed radically in the years since then. New regulations to control the health risk from asbestos came into force in 1970, backed by stringent hygiene standards 1019 for the control of asbestos dust. These regulations are being rigorously enforced by the Factories Inspectorate, who are currently instructed to make special visits to all firms subject to the Asbestos Regulations.
"Fifty-one firms have been successfully prosecuted for 120 contraventions of the Regulations. Effective use is also being made of the new powers given to the Executive under the Health and Safety at Work Act since the beginning of 1975. Sixty-six prohibition notices and 15 improvement notices have been imposed on 45 firms to remedy hazards involving asbestos.
"More than 150,000 copies of a leaflet Asbestos and You have been distributed to workers in the industry; 193,000 copies of technical data notes on asbestos have been distributed free, and 27,500 copies of an on-sale booklet Asbestos Health Precautions in Industry. Guidance is also to be issued shortly on the problem of dust arising from the use of sprayed asbestos in buildings. A labelling scheme for consumer products is being introduced.
"In 1971, work started on a long-term medical environmental survey of asbestos workers. This survey is intended to obtain more information about the medical effects of asbestos exposure and to measure the effectiveness of dust control methods for the protection of workers.
"I have discussed the present position with the Chairman of the Health, and Safety Commission and the Director of the Health and Safety Executive. I have every confidence in the way they, and the Factory Inspectors throughout the country, are carrying out their responsibilities.
"However, we still do not know all we need to know about the health risks from asbestos, including risks to the public and the causes of mesothelioma. The Health and Safety Commission, by agreement with Ministers concerned, has therefore decided to set up a committee to undertake a wide-ranging review of the health risks from asbestos and to make recommendations on any further action which, in their view, ought to be taken.
1020 "The Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Simpson, will himself act as chairman of the new committee, whose membership will be announced in due course. Interested Government Departments, including the Central Unit of Environmental Pollution, will be closely involved in the work of the committee.
"The composition of the committee will reflect a wide range of scientific, medical and practical expertise and will include representatives from both sides of industry. The committee will have the following terms of reference:
"To review the risks to health arising from exposure to asbestos or products containing asbestos including: persons exposed at work; members of the public exposed to asbestos generated from work activities; and members of the public exposed to asbestos from consumer products and from asbestos waste.
"To make recommendations as to whether any further protection is required.
"The committee's terms of reference enable it to cover all risks from asbestos, including its release into the working and general environment and either to satisfy itself that present safeguards are adequate or to make recommendations on how improvements should be made.
"The report of the committee will be published and considered by the Health and Safety Commission and Ministers responsible for the matters reviewed.
"I wish, in conclusion, to thank my honourable friend, the Member for Sowerby, whose skill and persistence in raising this matter has been of such importance for his own constituents and for many others besides."
My Lords, that ends the Statement. But before I sit down, may I add a further point in view of my right honourable friend's deserved tribute to Mr. Max Madden, the Member of Parliament for Sowerby? As my noble friend has already said, in this House the matter has been pursued diligently by a number of noble Lords, but most notably by my noble friend Lord Hale. I think it would be your Lordships' wish that I should 1021 pay tribute to the zeal, persistence and deep knowledge which my noble friend has brought to this subject over a long period.
§ 3.52 p.m.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, I know that my noble friends would wish me to thank the noble Lord, Lord Oram, for that Statement and to join in his generous tribute to the persistent work done by the noble Lord, Lord Hale, in this regard. We, on this side of the House, welcome the very necessary action being taken on a matter of deep public concern. But noble Lords will recognise that it is very difficult to make any responsible reply, in view of the fact that the report is not available. Of course, we accept the very courteous explanation given to us by the noble Baroness, Lady Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe, as to why this report is not now available, but perhaps one or two points should be put to your Lordships. Naturally, I am not asking for an immediate reply from the noble Lord, Lord Oram, but I should be grateful if he would take them into consideration and at some later stage give an answer, perhaps in the Official Report.
First, I understand that this disease is a long-term one, that the effects of asbestos dust are delayed, and one cannot tell for perhaps 20 to 25 years whether such a disease has been contracted. But though it seems from the Press reports and the Statement that the last investigation went up to 1970, we have had to wait six years for the report which is now being given to the honourable Member for Sowerby. So I should like to know whether the delay has occurred because the effects on the individual who made the original complaint were not known until much later than 1970, or whether the effects were known earlier but it has taken six years for the administrative procedures to reach the present stage.
Secondly, with regard to the warnings on goods to be sold, I appreciate that in the Statement there is mention of the fact that asbestos goods which are to be sold to the general public will be labelled. But in view of the very widespread recommendations by various Departments to save energy and to use insulating materials in houses which are under construction, and suggesting that individuals 1022 do this work themselves and at their own expense, it is surely urgent that consumers throughout the country should be warned of the possible dangers of working with this material which produces dust, particularly as it is laid in attics which are always in a very enclosed space and with no outlet for fresh air. I should have thought that a quick TV campaign, or something like that, was needed to make consumers realise the dangers of this material—if, indeed, it is proved to be so dangerous.
Thirdly, I should like to comment on the composition of the committee. I notice that the Statement says:
…we still do not know all we need to know about the health risks from asbestos";and the immediate reaction of the Government, as always, is to set up a committee of experts. This seems to me a contradiction in terms, because, if we do not know all the results, who are these various experts who will make this wide-ranging review? So I should like to ask the noble Lord—and, again, I do not expect an immediate answer—what research is being done in universities and by scientific institutions to find out exactly what are the dangers of asbestos to the health of individuals. It seems to me that this is a very important area for research where money could be well spent, and the fact that this committee is being set up should not stop urgent research into it. For the time being, those are all the questions we on this side wish to ask. We shall, of course, look forward with interest to reading the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner when it is available, and reserve our right to raise further questions then. Finally, I thank the noble Lord again for repeating this Statement.
§ 3.56 p.m.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, on behalf of my noble friends, I should like to thank the Government for making that Statement, for their immediate acceptance of the recommendations of the Parliamentary Commissioner and for the establishment of the committee to which the noble Lord referred. May I ask him whether the committee will be empowered to look at materials which are increasingly being used in substitution for asbestos, in regard to which the Central Electricity Generating Board has given the 1023 lead of applying the same regulations as are laid down in the 1969 rules for asbestos? Will the committee also be able to extend its study to the aetiology of other malignant neoplasms of the pleural cavity, caused by materials similar to asbestos? I should point out that, of course, I do not expect immediate answers to these questions, any more than does the noble Baroness.
May I also ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that the Chairman of the Health and Safety Commission has pointed out that the hazards of asbestos extend to many groups of workers who were not at the time covered by the Factories Act, and will the committee look at the position of those workers prior to the Health and Safety at Work Act? Is the study, which the noble Lord mentioned, the one which the EMAS is conducting in conjunction with the Factories Inspectorate on the long-term medical environmental survey to monitor the health of asbestos workers? If that is so, will the noble Lord consider whether this committee might make an interim report in order that the workers concerned can be properly informed, in accordance with the provisions of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act?
Also, can the noble Lord say whether the Medical Research Council's pneumoconiosis unit at Penarth, which was planning a detailed study employing the latest methods of identification of asbestos in lung tissues, has made an interim report, and whether any further recommendations on the hazards of asbestos were made by the Department of Health and Social Security's Standing Sub-Committee on Cancer, when they considered this matter at their meeting on 29th October? Finally, will the committee be able to take into account evidence not only from this country but also from the many studies overseas, particularly those which have been made in Canada and the USA on the epidemiology of asbestos and mesothelioma?
§ 3.58 p.m.
Lord ORAMMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Elles, and the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, for the nature of their questions and for releasing me from any obligation to go into too detailed an answer. First, in some reply to the 1024 noble Baroness, I can confirm that this is a disease which develops long term and, therefore, the investigation which started in 1971 cannot have reached very firm conclusions. But, if I may say so, I think she was mixing two reports, unless I misunderstood her. The medical investigation to which I have just referred, which started in 1971, has not yet been concluded. That is not the same report as the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner.
Therefore, we are dealing with two different reports. The noble Baroness raised the question of labelling and the need to give warnings to consumers. I can assure her that other Departments of Government will be taking an interest in the setting up of this committee, and I have no doubt that the points that have been raised by the noble Baroness will be looked at carefully by the Department of Prices and Consumer Protection and that they will take note of what she has said. The noble Baroness then asked about the research that is taking place in universities. Clearly I cannot give a detailed answer to that question, but it seems almost self-evident that when the committee gets to work it will immediately set about asking itself that same question and will be looking at the work which is being done in research institutes. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, asked whether the Committee would take the question of substitutes within its aegis.
As I read them out, the terms of reference refer to exposure to asbestos or products containing asbestos; so if one reads the terms of reference very strictly, I suppose the answer may be, No. If, on the other hand, the Committee takes a common sense approach to its work, the point which the noble Lord has made will be taken care of. In any case, I will ensure that my right honourable friend is made aware of that point, which seems to me to be an important one in relation to the terms of reference. I think that the noble Lord will confess that his other points are very technical and detailed. I feel it will be better, therefore, if I find some other way of communicating the answers to him.
Baroness VICKERSMy Lords, hope that the noble Lord will forgive me for not being present when he repeated the Statement, but I was listening to the Minister making his Statement in the 1025 other House. May I express my sympathy with the relations of the 40 people who are known to have died. They must have had great anxiety, since these cases go on for so long. I understand that 350 cases may be developing over the next 15 or 20 years. May I therefore ask the noble Lord what protection and care these cases will be given? In view of the fact that £2 million was paid in damages during the last six years, I cannot understand why the health authorities were not more careful in their inspections and more assiduous in trying to find out the causes. One person, for example, received £35,000 in compensation. In view of the report we have read in the Press that within 100 yards of the junior and infants school there is an asbestos waste dump, surely before the Committee reports this matter might be looked into. It is known that at least six residents who live in the neighbourhood but who have not worked in the factory have already contracted this disease, because it is carried through the air in dust and can affect anybody who is living in the neighbourhood. I hope, therefore, that action will be taken swiftly.
Lord ORAMMy Lords, I am sure that the whole House echoes the sympathy of the noble Baroness with those who have suffered through the situation which has developed. Turning to the second question of the noble Baroness, I am not clear whether she fully appreciates that the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner deals with the situation up to 1970 and that since then considerable action has been taken, some of which was dealt with in the Statement of my right honourable friend. Cognisance has, therefore, been taken of the situation and it is better now than it was during the period reported upon. I do not say that everything is satisfactory; that is why a Committee is necessary to find out whether more can be done. I am glad that the noble Baroness raised the question of the dump. The Committee will be sitting for a longish period to examine this complex question, but certain practical matters are revealed in the Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner—the noble Baroness has called attention to one—which ought to have immediate attention and ought not to wait for a Committee to examine them at length. Therefore, I will certainly call the atten- 1026 tion of my right honourable friend to the point that the noble Baroness has made.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, may I thank my noble friend for what he has said. Realising that my noble friend is answering on behalf of a colleague and perhaps has not been fully informed, would it be in order for me to ask him to remember that for nearly two years one of the most efficient medical monitoring services has been conducted within his own Department. It is under Dr. Greenberg at the Employment Medical Advisory Service at Notting Hill. Also, the committee of experts at Luxembourg, of which Dr. W. J. Turner is a member, is considering at the moment, with a large body of representative experts, a massive medical report that has been compiled after immense research. There really is no shortage of medical research. However, there are two diseases, and nobody can speak with authority about their length and incidence. May I put one point to my noble friend, which I regard as of real urgency. I gather that the report will disclose what certainly is the truth: that within 100 yards of this mill there is a grass mound which is full of asbestos, which is an active source of poisoning, which at this very moment is—I use the inaccurate word "radiating", but I use it metaphorically—radiating poison and which, the moment dry weather comes, may still be a potential source of further poisoning within this industrial area. This is not a matter for heads but for spades and bulldozers and action must be taken.
Lord ORAMMy Lords, it would be false of me to say that I was aware of the information contained in the first part of my noble friend's question, but I am sure that he will continue with his diligence and make sure that the committee becomes aware of that and all other relevant information. I notice that my noble friend has tabled an Unstarred Question relating to health, and I think he will agree that that will be the more appropriate time to pursue these matters. My noble friend referred to a grass mound, which I think is the same as "the dump" referred to by the noble Baroness, Lady Vickers. All I would ask is that my noble friend should study the reply that I gave to the noble Baroness.
§ Viscount THURSOMy Lords, may I ask a brief, factual question. The Statement mentioned 51 prosecutions. Are 1027 Her Majesty's Government satisfied with the level of fines being imposed when prosecutions have successfully been brought? I am told that in January 1975 there were three successful prosecutions against a firm in Glasgow, for which the penalties were £20, £30 and £40 out of a maximum penalty of £400.
Lord ORAMMy Lords, this is a matter on which I should not like to pronounce now, but obviously it is a most important point. If these fines are to be deterrents, they must be looked at and I will ensure that they are.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, from the Back Benches may I confirm what has been said from both Front Benches in tribute to my noble friend Lord Hale. I was in another place with him for many years and the persistence with which he drew attention to the danger of asbestos is something that we all remember. When he first raised this issue, if his advice had been accepted, many lives might have been saved. I want to pay my tribute to him for the exposure which he made before it was popular and which now has been so tragically endorsed.