§ 2.28 p.m.
§ Lord Beaverbrook rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 7th July be approved [2nd Report of the Joint Committee].
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, these draft regulations are necessary to prevent serious accidents in which young children—mostly between two and six years old—have slipped through a gap in a bunk bed and trapped their heads. They are concerned with making safe any such gaps in the construction of a hunk bed which can give rise to this hazard. The department has consulted all interested organisations, including trade consumer and health bodies. Views have also been sought from hoteliers, caravan manufacturers and others in the holiday trade who make use of bunk beds. All agree on the need for the regulations.
§ As a result of the helpful comments we have received some improvements to the draft regulations have been made, without the need for major revision. For example, a strength requirement has been added to ensure that the boundaries of regulated gaps do not expand beyond the upper limit of 75 millimetres when under pressure from a child's body.
§ All beds with a sleeping surface—that is, the surface which supports the mattress—at a height of 800 millimetres or more above floor level will come within the scope of the regulations. They will apply not only to bunk beds with two sleeping units but also to single beds with a high sleeping surface above a storage space or play area.
§ The draft regulations specify particular dimensions for gaps in relevant parts of a bed. Any gap in the sleeping surface of a bunk bed will be required not to exceed 75 millimetres. Gaps elsewhere in the structure of the bed must be between 60 millimetres and 75 millimetres. All regulated gaps must be measured in accordance with the method prescribed in the schedule to the draft regulations. This specifies the use of a cone apparatus—illustrated in the schedule—which must be capable of exerting a force of 100 Newtons (about 22lbs.) to the boundaries of any gap. This is the strength requirement which I mentioned earlier. In addition, the cone will be used, without the application of any force, to measure those gaps which must also be at least 60 millimetres.
§ The 60 millimetre and 75 millimetre dimensions are derived from anthropometric data on children between two and six years. This is the age group most at risk. Taking account of head, chest, hip and limb 1527 measurements, and their capacity to compress, 75 millimetres provides a gap which is too small for a child's body to slip through and trap the head. Sixty millimetres is big enough to prevent an arm or leg being trapped.
§ The "permissible gap" criteria will apply to gaps which are at or above the sleeping surface of a bed which is 800 millimetres or more above floor level. Thus in the case of a bunk bed with two sleeping surfaces, the requirements will relate only to the upper bed. This is because the particular hazard with which we are dealing only arises in beds with a high sleeping surface, from which the child's body can be suspended by the neck.
§ Entrapment accidents have caused serious injuries, some fatalities and a great many near misses. The requirements of the draft regulations are not unduly burdensome or costly. Some manufacturers have already redesigned their beds in advance of the regulations and have not encountered any particular problems in doing so.
§ Finally, I should point out that there is a printing error in Regulation 2. An extraneous question mark appears in the fourth line from the bottom of the first page. This question mark will be removed on final printing. I invite your Lordships to approve the draft regulations.
§ Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 7th July be approved [2nd Report of the Joint Committee.]—(Lord Beaverbrook.)
§ Lord Williams of ElvelMy Lords, the House will be grateful to the noble Lord for introducing the regulations and for explaining them so carefully. They provide a solution, possibly a partial solution, to what has become a serious problem—that of children between the ages of two and six years (who, as the noble Lord said, are most at risk) slipping through gaps which should really not be there under proper safety provisions and maiming themselves or indeed sometimes killing themselves. We on this side of the House give a very warm welcome to the regulations, which we feel are necessary.
I have only one question to ask the noble Lord. It concerns not the bunk beds that may be sold or supplied in the future but those which are in use and continue to be in use. Is there any mechanism (there may be none) by which the Government can ensure that those already in use are brought up to the standards of those which are to be sold in the future if these regulations are put into effect? I hope the noble Lord will be able to give us some reassurances, though I recognise that there may be statutory problems concerning the powers of the Government to do so. Having asked that question, in the hope of a responsible, sensible and encouraging reply, as I say we warmly welcome the regulations and congratulate the Government on bringing them forward.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, before my noble friend replies may I say that I have found his speech absolutely fascinating? It has entered a whole sphere which I did not know about. I did not know that children were in the habit of sliding through bunk beds and hanging themselves. It seems to me quite extraordinary. Can my noble friend say how often 1528 this happens? Is it a frequent occurrence or does it happen quite seldom? Presumably it must be a great deal more frequent than most noble Lords would think; otherwise my noble friend would not have brought in such regulations.
§ Lord SomersMy Lords, will the noble Lord be so kind as to tell me what 75 millimetres is in English?
§ Baroness PhillipsMy Lords, mine is perhaps a rather simpler question. Are these regulations mandatory or voluntary? My work on British Standards has shown me that voluntary codes are almost useless, but mandatory codes work better.
§ Lord Taylor of BlackburnMy Lords, following on from the question put to the Minister by the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, as regards cases where these kinds of beds have been in use for some time, is it possible—through organisations such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, local authority associations, the Boy Scout association and other such organisations which use bunk beds for one purpose or another—for the Government to draw attention to the dangers of the present structure through a publicity campaign?
§ Lord BeaverbrookMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Williams, for asking that question. The answer is that some of the beds currently in use could be a danger to children. The department issued a press release on 15th October 1986 urging parents who had already purchased bunk beds to check the gaps. They were advised to contact their supplier if they had any doubts about the safety of their beds. Manufacturers have produced modification kits for existing bunk beds to reduce the size of gaps in guard rails, which is a major area of concern.
In regard to the question put to me by the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, these are mandatory regulations. I am not equipped with a ruler at the Dispatch Box in order that I may interpret dimensions into inches, but perhaps I can let the noble Lord know the answer to his questions, at a later time.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, if I may assist, the answer is approximately three inches.
§ Lord BeaverbrookMy Lords, with regard to the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, in respect of a publicity campaign, all parents should be careful about the use of beds of this nature, whether it be in the home or wherever. The department issued a press notice and I hope that all people using bunk beds will take careful note of the potential dangers which can be experienced.
In reply to my noble friend Lord Ferrers, I believe that there have been nine deaths since 1968. That of course is nine too many. I commend these regulations to your Lordships.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.