Passive Smoking (Hansard, 23 July 2002)

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, passive smoking over a prolonged period is dangerous. We are taking action to ensure that smokers are aware of the dangerous effects that their habit has on those around them. The public places charter is encouraging the provision of smoke-free places to eat and drink, and local tobacco alliances are being specifically funded to develop projects tackling passive smoking.

§ Lord Faulkner of Worcester
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. He will be aware that the Government's own scientific committee on tobacco and health has now concluded that passive smoking is a cause of cancer, heart disease and respiratory illness; and that American physicians now have an obligation to warn non-smokers against exposure to second-hand smoke. So does my noble friend appreciate that the lack of progress in introducing the approved code of practice on passive smoking at work proposed by the HSC almost two years ago—and indeed supported by my noble friend's department in the White Paper, Smoking Kills, four years ago—is most disappointing? Does my noble friend accept that children need to be protected, and that it is unacceptable for parents to take them into designated smoking areas such as those in airport lounges?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, there is an issue in regard to parental responsibility. Judgments 189 have to be made by parents, just as we should encourage the provision of non-smoking areas as much as possible. As regards the approved code of practice, we are giving careful consideration to the commission's proposals. As part of that careful consideration, we have asked the Health and Safety Commission to consider the implications of the code on the hospitality sector and on small businesses generally. We shall be considering what further advice the commission gives us.

§ Lord Clement-Jones
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the reply he has just given is identical to the one he gave in February 2001? Clearly, there has been no progress since the matter was last debated in this House. Perhaps I may invite the Minister to accept the statement of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. It invites the Government to make smoke-free areas the absolute norm in enclosed places to which the public have access. Is that any more to the Minister's taste?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I am glad that I am consistent in my responses to this House. I have said that we take this matter very seriously. That is why the Health and Safety Commission has consulted on its approved code of practice. It is why the Government are giving consideration to it, and why we have asked the commission to do further work, looking at the impact of such a code of practice on small businesses. Surely that is an appropriate and proportionate way to proceed. Of course I understand the importance of such a code of practice. But we must also bear in mind the potential impact of such a code on business generally and on small businesses in particular. I do not believe that it is wrong for the Government to say to the Health and Safety Commission that we want it to look very carefully at the likely impact on small businesses.

§ Baroness Gale
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that there are now proven strong links between passive smoking and childhood asthma? What further advice can the Government give to parents to alert them to this great danger to their children? Will my noble friend further agree that, despite all the advice given on passive smoking, we ought to be moving towards a total ban on smoking on all forms of public transport?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, we have to be wary of legislating for bans in this area. Our focus needs to be on health promotion and health education. I agree with the substance of my noble friend's point about asthma attacks in children. That is one of the issues that we should seek to take forward in any future education campaigns.

§ Lady Saltoun of Abernethy
My Lords, endless no-smoking areas seem to be provided now, and hardly 190 any smoking areas. Poor smokers! Why do people who have given up smoking have to be quite so nasty to those who have not?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I am not a health fascist. It is entirely appropriate that smoking and non-smoking environments are provided. We should not seek to demonise smokers. We should seek to encourage them to give up smoking if they wish to do so. We need a proportionate response. The smoking cessation services on which we have embarked have had great success in helping those who have given up smoking to continue the good work.

§ Baroness O'Cathain
My Lords, how long will it be before we get any action on this issue? Four years ago there was a report; two years ago there was a code of conduct; and we are still consulting and wanting to know about a proportionate response—and people are dying of lung cancer.

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I cannot give the noble Baroness a date, but I can tell her that we are continuing to give this matter very great consideration. It is important that the Health and Safety Commission gives us further advice on the potential impact on small businesses, and that we should await that advice before making any further decisions.

§ Viscount Simon
My Lords, in my noble friend's original Answer, he said that passive smoking can be dangerous over long periods. Being asthmatic, I know that it can be dangerous over very short periods. Does my noble friend agree that although many places have no-smoking areas, drifting smoke from smoking areas can frequently be present?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I agree. That is why we encourage businesses and those who run public buildings to ensure that there are proper non-smoking areas. We all know that it can be uncomfortable in a restaurant when smoke wafts over to the non-smoking area. That is the reason why we must consider carefully the impact of the code on small businesses and the measures that they would have to take to avoid that.