§ 11.15 a.m.
§ Lord Dean of Beswick asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ How many lives have been lost over the last 10 years in houses in multiple occupation and hostels 1008 due to the incidence of fire, and whether any measures are being contemplated to deal with this problem.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, because of some change in the recording practice by fire brigades consistent information is available only from 1982. In the period 1982 to 1986 there were 432 deaths in fires in the UK in detached, semi-detached or terraced houses in multiple occupation and 23 deaths in fires in hostels or similar institutions. Her Majesty's Government will be issuing guidance on means of escape from houses in multiple occupation later this year. We are considering the way in which means of escape from fire can be included in future housing legislation.
§ Lord Dean of BeswickMy Lords, I am extremely grateful to the Minister for that very informative reply. May I ask him whether the advisory standards which are to be issued later this year will be mandatory or optional? If they are optional, is he aware that because of lack of resources many local authorities will certainly not implement them and the carnage suggested in the figures he has given today will continue? I do not think that that is what any of us in your Lordships' House or elsewhere wishes to see happen.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the guidance will cover within its scope some 80 per cent. of houses in multiple occupation. It will not have statutory force, but it is anticipated that it will help to raise the standards of means of escape in many more than 8 per cent. of the houses in multiple occupation upon which there is a duty to provide means of escape. A mandatory grant is available for up to 90 per cent. of the cost of the provision of means of escape from fire in those houses in multiple occupation which are required to have them.
Viscount St. DavidsMy Lords, since the great majority of fires in such buildings are caused by overloaded electric circuits, can the noble Earl tell us how far it is now compulsory to have electronic residual current circuit-breakers fitted in those houses? Is that now compulsory?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the noble Viscount is very ingenious in putting his question, but I believe that if he thinks about it again he will realise that it is far outside the scope of the present Question. I should be delighted to answer if he would be kind enough to put down a Question specifically on electronic contact-breakers.
§ Lord AucklandMy Lords, I should like to declare my interest as a non-executive vice president of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. Has the Minister any evidence of unguarded electric fires and old-fashioned oil heaters, which I believe are illegal anyway, being in evidence in such properties? If so, have any recommendations been made concerning them at inquests into such tragedies?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the Question refers specifically to houses in multiple occupation and to 1009 hostels. I do not have the detailed information for which my noble friend has asked because it is outside the scope of the Question.
§ Lord MishconMy Lords, is not the answer to the question of houses in multiple occupation and hostels that they ought to be designated under the Act dealing with fire prevention and required to have a certificate as a result? Is the Minister aware that the greatest fire authority dealing with the problem, namely the one which covers the metropolis, is extremely anxious as a matter of policy that that should happen so that it can as a fire authority have proper liaison with the housing authority?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, one of the problems which has been considered in drawing up the guidance is the connection between the Home Office, the fire authorities and local authorities. I think that the suggestion which the noble Lord has put forward would have considerable resource implications, but we are considering ways in which means of escape from fire can be included in future housing legislation.
§ Lord Dean of BeswickMy Lords, is the Minister not aware that I am somewhat disappointed at his answer to my supplementary question that there will still be a large number of properties for which the necessity to provide that type of accommodation without fire risk will be left to the mercies of individual local authorities? As he said, considerable resources will be necessary to bring those buildings up to standard.
The point I wish to make is that the more that provision is left as a non-obligatory function, the longer the risk will continue. Is the Minister further aware of the concern shown by authorities and associations which arc grappling with this problem? I know that they will be extremely disappointed to learn that there will still be some loopholes left should the advisory standards be as depicted by the Minister in his Answer.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, local authorities can serve a notice under Section 366 of the Housing Act 1985 requiring the provision of means of escape from fire. There is a duty in respect of houses in multiple occupation of three storeys or more and with 500 square metres of floor area, and there is a discretionary power for local authorities in respect of smaller properties. At the moment the Government are not convinced that further powers are necessary and no authorities have said that they serve notice only where the duty applies. They appear to discharge their duties on fire safety as regards houses in multiple occupation outside their legal duty.
§ Lord LeatherlandMy Lords, can the Minister say whether the expression "multiple occupation" as it appears in the Question covers the case of families who have a mother-in-law living with them?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, I think that they would have to live in separate apartments within the same building and that there would have to be more than two of them.