---

10.14 am

Mr. Bill Michie (Sheffield, Heeley): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Burden) on giving us the opportunity to debate this important issue.

I want to start my speech where my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) left off. We are not here as killjoys to try to stop people enjoying themselves or to try to stop various organisations and religious bodies celebrating holy days--that is nonsense. The Firework Safety Bill and the debate are about the effect that fireworks can have on ordinary citizens who have no argument with people enjoying themselves, but are merely asking for some consideration. Animal owners also need consideration, but I shall come to that subject later. This is a debate not about how to stop people enjoying themselves, but about how we can find a way of ensuring that people can still celebrate while protecting those who are greatly affected by fireworks.

No one doubts the fact that fireworks give pleasure. I thoroughly enjoy attending the displays at my local park. It is worth congratulating local authorities and other organisations that put on tremendous displays, in safety, and that often educate children on the dangers of fireworks, how to place them safely and how to stand away. People should be congratulated on holding firework displays and educating others.

Safety is a priority, particularly for organised bonfires. As my hon. Friends have already said, how can it be safe for someone to let off a £20 or £60 shell in their back garden if he is meant to stand 25 yd away from the firework? Many back gardens are not 25 yd long, so people would have to stay in the house--the firework would no doubt blow all the windows out. One firework, which must have misfired, came over my fence and exploded above the lawn. I was amazed that none of my windows were blown in. All the fire alarms, burglar alarms and car alarms went crazy. Who knows what would have happened if anyone had been within a couple of yards of that firework--admittedly, it misfired. Some fireworks have a shell casing, which is almost like shrapnel when they explode. We need to regulate such fireworks, some of which are powerful.

Most people enjoy the visual aspect of firework displays, which are fine if they are beautiful spectacles with a few crackles, but I see nothing visually beautiful about one big thud that frightens half the population to death and is then over. There is a difference between the two types of firework displays. I have doubts about how we can regulate the use of most fireworks. By banning bangers, we have gone a long way to answer most of the complaints raised in our surgeries.

I received a typical letter from an old lady in my constituency. She wrote:

"Dear Mr. Michie,


I sit in my home this evening, and feel as if I have been living in a war torn area for well over a month now".

She goes on to describe the loud explosions and the difficulties that she faces. She mentions the advice given by Rolf Harris on his programme when he told people to ensure that they kept their animals in on bonfire night as it was likely to be distressing for them. Keeping a dog or a cat inside for one or two nights is one thing, but how can someone keep a pet in for about two months, which seems to be the period in Sheffield?

20 Nov 1996 : Column 902

At the end of her letter, the old lady makes a plea. She asks:

"Yes, people have rights and some things are difficult to enforce, but could you please help us, speak up for us, the fed up majority, and quieten the minority that disturb the peace over a sickeningly long period of time?"

The letter finishes, "Help". I know that, like that old lady, some live in blocks with other old people, and I have talked to them. They are terrified at the sheer noise, which affects them psychologically.

I do not know whether we can restrict the time for selling. As my constituent said, that may be difficult because we have to consider religious groups that celebrate at different times of the year. It may be difficult to restrict the time during which fireworks can be used--it might be a good idea if they are not used after midnight--but it would not be too difficult to control the sale of fireworks. That would not stop people hoarding them and setting them off at the wrong time, but it would stop what is happening in a shop not far from where I live. It is open many hours a day, including Sundays, and sells nothing but fireworks for months on end. It encourages people to make impulse buys. If a child walks past the shop and realises that he has enough spending money to buy some fireworks, he will go in and purchase them. Restricting the times and dates on which fireworks can be sold may help to ease the problem.

As I said earlier, taking bangers out of the equation is certainly the most effective way of helping the majority of people. Old people and animals live in fear. Unfortunately, I no longer have a dog--mine died of old age many years ago. It was a sheep dog of a nervous disposition, to say the least, and for bonfire night and perhaps the night after, I used to get a tranquilliser for him from the vet. It did not actually knock him out but, for some unknown reason, he used to walk about as though he had gone deaf, so it obviously worked. The problem is, however, that it is not possible to keep giving animals tranquillisers for two months or more, just because some great firework might go off. There are therefore limits to what animal lovers can do to protect their animals, just as there are limits to what old people can do to protect their nerves.

The onus remains on the House to find some way of restricting bangers or, hopefully, banning them altogether. We must take action on behalf of those who do not want to kill the joys and pleasures of others, but who want only a little peace and quiet. That way all of us, not just a minority, can have a happy life.

10.20 am

Mr. David Hinchliffe (Wakefield): I am grateful for the opportunity to raise my concerns relating to the circumstances surrounding the death in November 1994 of my constituent, Mr. Roger Robinson. His case has already been mentioned by my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Burden) and for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman).

In November 1994, Mr. Robinson organised a display for elderly people at a care home in my constituency.He was killed as the result of the explosion of an

20 Nov 1996 : Column 903

aerial shell, which was exactly of the sort described by my hon. Friend the Member for Northfield. The inquest report indicates that

"The firework involved was 4 inch in diameter and is launched out of a mortar tube."

The evidence given at the inquest stated that

"the shell had a weight of almost 15 ounces, was intended to reach a height of 800 feet before ejecting its pyrotechnic effects, and would have been travelling at a speed of 225 mph when it came out of the top of the tube"--

and hit my constituent in the face.

The Minister is aware that I have been in correspondence with him, his Department and his predecessor about the circumstances of Mr. Robinson's death. I was especially concerned to learn from the Minister's predecessor--the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Evans)--who wrote to me on 11 August 1995, that import controls on fireworks exercised by the Health and Safety Executive had been abolished from 1 December 1993.

The Minister is well aware of the implications of that Government decision, which was presumably taken as part of the deregulation exercise mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield. The Minister will also be aware that there have been extensive representations from trading standards officers in various parts of the country, not least in West Yorkshire. Here, I commend the West Yorkshire trading standards officers; we are fortunate in our area to have some of the most effective and articulate officers in the country. They wrote to the Government stating that those aerial shells were unsuitable for the public and should be banned from public sale.

The Minister will be aware that the inquest into the death of Mr. Robinson was resumed on 30 November 1995. The coroner for my area is my namesake, Mr. David Hinchliff. At the end of the inquest, he made a specific statement, which I shall quote briefly. He stated to the court that

"pursuant to Rule 43 of the Coroners Rules,"

he intended

"to draw the attention of this fatality to the appropriate authorities, which in this case will be the Department of Trade and Industry."

Mr. Hinchliff added that he was acting

"in the hope that a fatality or fatalities of this nature can in the future be avoided, that is the very least that I feel that I can do in this situation".

I have a copy of the detailed letter that he subsequently sent to the Minister on 3 January 1996. The letter makes his feelings clear. It states:

"My recommendation must therefore be that Aerial Shells of all sizes should not be available to the general public, and that they should be sold only to people who have undergone appropriate theoretical and practical training."

I have a copy of the Minister's acknowledgment of that letter.

I know the Minister reasonably well and have always found him to be a decent and honourable man who is competent in his work. He always receives me well when we meet. However, I have to ask what has been going on--Mr. Robinson's death occurred in 1994 and the circumstances have been reported to his Department on

20 Nov 1996 : Column 904

more than one occasion. Needless deaths have occurred that might have been avoided. I do not want to make a political point--the issue is too serious for that--but deregulation appears to have overtaken common sense and the sad consequences are there for all to see.

I want to repeat the point made by other hon. Members, particularly by my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield. I know of Standard Fireworks and I and my family have used its products over many years. It is a company of repute and I want to endorse the comments made by hon. Members to the effect that the industry wants not deregulation, but more regulation. Yesterday, I met Mr. John Woodhead of Standard Fireworks, who spoke in detail of his concerns about the implications for the industry of the sort of incident that I have described. Clearly, such incidents are not in the industry's interests and Mr. Woodhead wants more regulation, especially import controls--precisely the opposite of the Government's action in 1993. He wants there to be training along the lines described by several hon. Members this morning. Judging by our conversation, I am fairly certain that Mr. Woodhead would have no objection to bangers being banned altogether.

I have received representations from constituents similar to those mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Michie) and the hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Davies). People have had their lives made a misery in the period around bonfire night and they ask me why we have to have bangers. Would not having bangers really cause great difficulties? Would it really impact on the joy of bonfire night?

I am not a killjoy--in my childhood, bonfire night was one of the highlights of the year. In my area, we started preparing in August--chumping, we called it, which meant getting the wood in for the bonfire. It was a great event and I want that to continue. I do not see why we need to suffer the nuisance arising from bangers. I vividly remember the consequences for the guide dog belonging to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett). As the direct result of being frightened by a firework, the dog was run over and had to stop working for my hon. Friend, who had to get another guide dog.

---