§ Helen JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what representations he has received on extending the CORGI registration scheme to cover non-gas work carried out in conjunction with work on gas appliances; and if he will make a statement. [142638]
§ Mr. Meacher[holding answer 18 December 2000]: The Health and Safety Commission has received a number of representations on this issue in response to its Discussion Document "Gas safety review: Options for change" and an associated shorter document "Key issues for consumers". These are summarised in the Commission's report on the outcome of the Review: "Proposals for Change", a copy of which has been placed in the Library.
Non-gas work includes plumbing and electrical work not directly connected to gas safety, carried out by installers in conjunction with gas work on a combustion appliance. Only a minority of respondents to the Discussion Document expressed support for the extension of the CORGI registration scheme to cover such work. The great majority (53 out of 77, or over two-thirds) were not in favour of extending the scheme in this way. The same question raised in the associated consumer document elicited a similar balance of responses.
The 'non-gas' activities of installers are already subject to the general requirements of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 and associated regulations. The Commission has accepted the view that the increased prescriptive burden that an extension of the CORGI registration scheme would represent would be difficult to justify in safety terms. However, the Commission will ensure that the general health and safety requirements are duly emphasised in its Approved Code of Practice on "Standards of training in safe gas installation", which it plans to update in the light of the Review findings.
§ Helen JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what discussions he has had with other Government departments on ways of improving protection for consumers dealing with gas installation businesses; and if he will make a statement. [142639]
310W
§ Mr. Meacher[holding answer 18 December 2000]: I am currently considering, in conjunction with colleagues at the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Health, the Scottish Executive and the National Assembly for Wales the recommendations set out in the Health and Safety Commission's recent report "Fundamental Review of the Gas Safety Regime: Proposals for Change".
My preliminary view is that the report's recommendations include useful measures for making further improvements to the safety regime for the installation and use of gas. I am discussing the recommendations with my colleagues in Government along with more radical proposals in certain areas. The Government will issue a statement in the new year on implementation.
§ Helen JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what representations he has received on the desirability of introducing a scheme for the formal recording of gas equipment sales; and if he will make a statement. [142588]
§ Mr. Meacher[holding answer 18 December 2000]: The Health and Safety Commission has received a number of representations on this issue, in response to its discussion document "Gas safety review: Options for change". These are summarised in the Commission's report on the outcome of the Review, "Proposals for Change". A copy has been placed in the Library.
In response to a question on possible controls over do-it-yourself installation, the option of requiring retailers to record sales of gas equipment was supported by 26 respondents to the main Discussion Document, with 34 against; that of subsequent inspection by a central body was supported by 20, with 33 against. The parallel question in the associated shorter discussion document aimed at consumers elicited 36 in favour and 26 against such control. The main reservations expressed were over the possible compliance burden, bureaucracy and doubtful effectiveness of this approach.
A similar question was asked in relation to further action directed towards non-registered installers. Responses here were equally divided, with 14 in favour and the same number against. Several supporting this option did so in view of its potential deterrent effect on non-registered installers. Those against had concerns about the cost, bureaucracy and doubtful effectiveness of this approach.
The case for such action will be re-examined when additional data from improved accident reporting arrangements, to be introduced as part of the implementation of the Review findings, are available.