§ 2.43 p.m.
§ Baroness NicolMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will consider removing Crown immunity from prosecution from National Health Service establishments in regard to their waste disposal operations.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Baroness Trumpington)My Lords, the Government have no current plans to remove immunity from prosecution for waste disposal operations in National Health Service establishments.
§ Baroness NicolMy Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for replying, though I find that Answer rather disappointing. Does the Minister recall that when the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, in its eleventh report, drew attention to the shortcomings of National Health Service kitchens, it also drew attention to the shortcomings of National Health Service incinerators? Will she not agree that it seems unreasonable that their standards should be allowed to be any lower than those for other incinerators?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, while the report of the Royal Commission recommends the removal of Crown immunity from NHS waste disposal, it also points to procedures under the current legislation which provided safeguard against instances of air pollution arising from Crown property. Under the procedure in Section 22 of the Clean Air Act, local authorities, in the light of the findings of their environmental health officers, can submit reports and require the Secretary of State to investigate breaches of the regulations. The department will not tolerate immunity from prosecution being used by health authorities for not taking effective remedial action in response to adverse reports.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, is the Minister aware that her Answer is illogical? Only the other day, under pressure, the Government readily agreed—and we all welcomed this—that they would remove Crown immunity from hospitals, because of the food poisoning in a hospital up north. Now she is asked a similar Question about what must surely also be a menace and a threat. Why should these people be immune from prosecution? At the end of the day, it is a matter for the judge and jury to decide whether they are guilty. Why not let people have the chance?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, Clause 1 of the National Health Service (Amendment) Bill, published just before Easter, applies only to food handling, as the noble Lord said, in health service premises. The Bill 662 received an unopposed Second Reading yesterday in another place. Any waste emanating from NHS catering operations will be of a non-clinical nature, and its disposal will be without danger to the public.
§ Lord KilmarnockMy Lords, does not the National Health Service (Amendment) Bill now before Parliament provide an excellent vehicle for extending its provisions slightly to do precisely what the noble Baroness suggests?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, although the Government have no current plans to make changes on Crown immunity in respect of NHS waste disposal, we shall keep the situation under review. The Government expect the NHS to meet and maintain the standards required by the relevant Acts, and any evidence that suggests that health authorities are not paying due attention will be thoroughly investigated.
§ Lord EnnalsMy Lords, does not the noble Baroness accept that this is precisely what the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution was doing? It said, in relation to incinerators and other methods of waste disposal, that it was an historic anomaly that the National Health Service was excluded, and that many would fail to meet the standards required by the existing Acts. Can the noble Baroness explain what is the logic of making a change in relation to Crown immunity for kitchens, when so far we have not been prepared to do so for incinerators? Will she accept that clearly there is little logic in this, and if the matter is now under review will she note that there are certain to be amendments which will seek to make greater sense of the Bill than it now makes?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I have already replied on the position of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and its recommendations. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, would agree that repetition is rather boring.
§ Lord Edmund-DaviesMy Lords, does this dialogue not indicate that the piecemeal relaxation of the Crown immunity is not satisfactory, and that the Government should quickly address themselves to the question of the total abolition of the Crown immunity?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, that is rather wide of the Question before us today.
§ Lord Cledwyn of PenrhosMy Lords, with great respect to the noble Baroness, it is not wide of the Question. Will she say a little more about the review to which she has referred? Will she say who is conducting the review, what are the terms of reference, and what government departments are being considered in this review?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, the Question on the Order Paper refers to removing immunity from prosecution for waste disposal. It does not refer to other matters which are under Crown immunity. Therefore, I think that the noble and learned Lord's question was rather wide of the present Question. I have already said that we shall be keeping the situation under review. With regard to the make-up of the 663 Royal Commission, I shall have to write to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn.
§ Lord MellishBut, my Lords, this is nonsense. It must be understood that removal of Crown immunity does not mean that the Crown are necessarily in the wrong. It simply means that an ordinary, individual human being has a right to go to a court of law and take a case. The judge will listen, and if there is a jury they will consider it and give a verdict. Why should not people have the right to do that? Why should Crown immunity be given to people in the hospital world?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I have already replied to the original Question and have said that we have no current plans. I have said that the matter is under review, and I am in no position to answer for the whole of Crown immunity.
§ Baroness Masham of IltonMy Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness whether she is aware that there is great public concern because of the problem of the AIDS virus and also drug addicts? Is she aware that private homes are not immune, but local authority homes are immune as well as health service establishments? That seems an extraordinary anomaly.
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, guidance on AIDS which was issued to health professionals last year contained specific advice on disposal of clinical waste. Further guidance produced by the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens will be issued very soon. This will be aimed primarily at clinical, nursing and laboratory staff who might come into contact with patients who have been exposed to the HTLVIII virus, or specimens taken from them. The advice in the guidelines will also be relative to others as it covers such areas as post-mortems, body handling, disposal of waste, and maintenance and cleaning.
§ Baroness NicolMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that there is a new dimension now in the waste disposal problem from National Health Service establishments? It is that, under pressure from the Government to commercialise operations, I understand that some authorities are contemplating offering a service to local industries to dispose of their noxious waste in their incinerators. As this would patently be unfair, would not the noble Baroness agree that this would at the very least cause unfair competition with other disposers in the neighbourhood as well as being an added risk to health if Crown immunity is allowed to remain?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, the onus is on health authorities to provide their services in the most efficient and effective manner. Services to patients are paramount. If a health authority's incinerator has spare capacity then it is a matter of judgment for that health authority to decide whether it can increase its workload by taking on non-NHS work. All incinerators are subject to inspection by environmental health officers. Section 22 of the Clean Air Act allows for breaches of the Act through excessive pollution to be investigated. I can assure the noble Baroness, Lady Nicol, that the department will not 664 allow Crown immunity to be used by the NHS to unfair commercial advantage.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, in deference to the question put by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Edmund-Davies, will my noble friend the Minister not agree that it is certainly a tenable view that the removal of Crown immunity, far from being wide of the subject, lies at the heart and essence of it?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I have listened with great interest to my noble friend.
§ Lord Elwyn-JonesMy Lords, in view of the intimation of the noble Baroness the Minister that there is to be a Royal Commission into this matter, would it not be desirable—
§ Baroness TrumpingtonNo, my Lords, I did not say that.
§ Lord Elwyn-JonesI thought that was said, my Lords. Perhaps I may complete my question, and then it can be corrected by the noble Baroness. In the light of the intervention by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Edmund-Davies, and by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, would there not now be a case for a Royal Commission into the more general question of Crown immunity, including a specific consideration of the matters referred to in the Question?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I think I referred to the report of the Royal Commission on environmental pollution. I am not aware that I mentioned any further Royal Commission. I shall certainly pass on the remarks of the noble and learned Lord to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State.
§ Lord DiamondMy Lords, could the noble Baroness help an ordinary layman?
Viscount St. DavidsMy Lords, one knows that there are many cases and matters in this country to which Crown immunity applies. One knows that there is a power in the Crown to waive that immunity wherever it considers it should be waived. Can the noble Baroness tell me whether this power applies in these hospital cases, and would it be waived if the matter was considered to be serious enough?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I am not sure what hospital cases the noble Lord refers to. I am not in a position to give any answer on the waiving of Crown immunity.
§ Lord DiamondMy Lords, the question I was going to ask the noble Baroness ties up very much with the question that has just been asked. Is it not the case that there is ample precedent for the Government not relying upon Crown immunity in cases where they do not think it proper so to do?
§ Baroness TrumpingtonMy Lords, I really am unaware of any cases. If the noble Lord has any particular cases, perhaps he would bring them to my notice.