| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Health and Safety
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): Before I call the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) to move the motion, I must announce that Madam Speaker has selected the amendment standing in the name of the Prime Minister.
7.18 pm
Mr. Michael Meacher (Oldham, West): I beg to move,
- That this House notes that workplace accidents caused over 30,000 deaths and major injuries and over 138,000 injuries involving three or more days off work in 1994-95; notes that threatened Government cuts mean, in the words of the Chairman of the Health and Safety Commission, that "we can not meet all the expectations and requirements that Government, Parliament and the Courts are placing on us with the resources now available"; recognises that privatisation of the nuclear, mining, gas and railway industries is increasing the burden of safety regulation and enforcement placed on the Health and Safety Executive; believes that a safe and secure working environment is essential to the well-being of employees and to economic success; notes that the Commission does not believe that health and safety is a burden to small business; and therefore calls on the Government to withdraw the threat of funding cuts from the Health and Safety Executive and to reverse deregulation initiatives that threaten health and safety standards.
It is not often that a leaked document so comprehensively endorses the Opposition's case against the Government, and it is all the more striking when it has been written by one of the Government's appointees. The letter that is to be sent by Mr. Frank Davies, the chairman of the Health and Safety Commission and formerly chairman of Rockware plc, does exactly that.
The Opposition have constantly said that the Tory Government were taking unacceptable risks with safety. We are now told officially by the chairman of the Health and Safety Commission:
He could not be clearer than that.
The Opposition have constantly said that health and safety were underfunded. We are now told authoritatively:
Mr. Davies is asking for £18 million, which is pretty optimistic--
Mr. Keith Mans (Wyre):
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
No, I shall go through what is in the letter. If, when he has listened to that, the hon. Gentleman wishes to come in, I shall be pleased to take his intervention.
The Opposition have constantly argued that proper health and safety provision was a foundation both of employee safety and of corporate success, not a penalty. Here we are told, by a former company chairman:
We have constantly asserted that privatisation undermined safety. We are now officially informed:
Mr. Mans:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
I have not finished with the letter yet, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman wants to hear what his own Government-appointed chairman of the Health and Safety Commission had to say.
The Opposition have constantly argued that the Government's deregulation dogma puts safety at risk. Now we have it officially on the record that
that is, action in reviewing and dismantling regulations--
is
That leaked letter blows out of the water the Government's complacent claim that safety was being protected, and that there were no grounds to fear that lives were being put at risk. They clearly were, and they clearly still are.
Dr. Robert Spink (Castle Point):
Will the hon. Gentleman give way now that he has finished with the letter?
Dr. Spink:
The hon. Gentleman has just read out a letter. Does he believe what it says? Does he think that health and safety are underfunded by the Government? If so, by how much does he think the Government should increase their spending, and will that be a Labour spending commitment?
Mr. Meacher:
It is perfectly clear that health and safety are underfunded, and that the chairman of the Health and Safety Commission believes that an extra £18 million is the minimum necessary to restore spending to what he regards as the bottom line. Indeed, I am sure that he would say that a great deal more was needed.
I notice that the Conservative Government never fail to fund money for inspectors to check on social security fraud. There are several hundred more of them then there are dealing with industrial safety. If the Government want more money, clearly they can find it for such purposes.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (Colchester, North)
rose--
Mr. Meacher:
No, I shall not give way for a moment.
Just as the nation is now learning to its cost that ministerial reassurances over BSE--bovine spongiform encephalopathy--were either misleading or even downright dishonest, so on all five counts--
Mr. Jenkin:
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I clearly heard the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) imply that statements made by Ministers had been misleading--
Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham):
Or dishonest.
Mr. Jenkin:
--or dishonest. Surely that is out of order.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Statements referring to deliberate dishonesty are out of order. The hon. Member for Oldham, West might like to rephrase what he said.
Mr. Meacher:
I am happy to rephrase, Mr. Deputy Speaker, by omitting the word "deliberate". In the light of the revelations of the past week, I do not think that there are many people in the country who do not now believe that what Ministers said in the past did mislead, and was dishonest--although I am prepared to accept that that may not have been deliberate.
Mr. Jenkin:
He has just repeated it.
Mr. Meacher:
On all the five counts that I read out, the letter shows that ministerial assurances about safety were hardly worth the paper that they were written on.
Mr. Jacques Arnold:
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for the hon. Gentleman to withdraw something and then just repeat it? Is that not contempt of the House?
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
The hon. Gentleman did not just repeat it. The word that he used was "Ministers" in the plural; that is acceptable.
Mr. Meacher:
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Our first charge is that the Health and Safety Commission cannot meet the requirements laid down by Parliament. [Interruption.] I hope that Conservative Members, who, for understandable reasons, are rather exercised about BSE, will also pay attention to what has happened with HSE, which is just as serious.
As I said, the first charge is that the Health and Safety Commission cannot meet the requirements laid down by Parliament. Major injury rates in many industries are now rising. In the hotel and catering industry, for example, they have nearly doubled over the past decade. Among the self-employed, a fast-growing section of the population, the major injury rate has shot up by one third over the past 10 years, and the fatality rate among them is now more than double that of employees. Yet HSE staff numbers are falling.
Mr. Mans:
Just so that we can have the facts on the record, I shall ask the hon. Gentleman a question. Will it be the policy of any incoming Labour Government to restore the £18 million that he suggests has been cut from the HSE budget?
Mr. Meacher:
I shall not say yes or no; I shall give my own answer. I find it extraordinary that the
The fact is that HSE staff--
Mr. Jenkin:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
No; I shall get back to the subject that we are debating--the extremely damaging and dangerous health and safety situation that has resulted from Government cuts. When the hon. Gentleman has listened to a little more, if he has a relevant comment to make I shall give way.
The letter from the chairman of the commission notes that there are now 8 per cent. fewer staff than there were two years ago, and that further planned cuts will lead to a reduction of 20 per cent. by the turn of the century. Those are far bigger cuts than could possibly be absorbed by any improvements in efficiency. As a result, the HSE, in an unpublished work plan, shows that planned inspections are now falling sharply.
The number of inspections fell by 6 per cent. last year on the previous year, and will have fallen by a further 8 per cent. this year compared with last. Other essential HSE work is also falling behind. For example, the investigation of accidents and complaints is planned to fall by 8 per cent. over two years.
Most seriously of all, the number of proceedings instituted by HSE inspection staff for breaches, some of them pretty serious, of health and safety regulations fell over the two years to 1994 by no less than 26 per cent., so an extremely serious situation has now arisen.
"the Commission . . . conclude that we cannot meet all the expectations and requirements that the Government, Parliament and the Courts are placing on us with the resources now available."
"Assuming that our request for these additional resources is met"--
"and that there are no further budget restrictions, we will still be facing a range of cuts in our operations, including a reduction in the number of Field Operations Division inspectors and of preventive inspections."
"Cutting HSE does not reduce burdens on business."
26 Mar 1996 : Column 892
"Health and safety in the railway and gas industries in particular (though not exclusively) are high on the agenda of public concern; nuclear privatisation will raise similar concerns."
"the pressure for new action"--
"not least from the Deregulation Task Force and Unit,"
"relentless".
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |