Gillian
Merron: As we have heard, the clause gets to the heart of
the issue and would allow us to be sure that people aged under 18
cannot use a sunbed at a sunbed business, except for medical reasons.
The Government wholeheartedly support that
provision. As
we have heard in Committee today and on other days in the House,
sunbeds pose a great health risk. We know that they are being used by
more young people
than ever before, and despite the efforts of industry, voluntary
regulation just is not working. A major contribution to tackling the
rise in skin cancer and preventing a generation of young people from
storing up damage for the future is indeed the restriction of access to
sunbeds by those who are under 18. The clause does the job for us. It
would place a legal duty on businesses to prevent sunbed use by
children, backing that up with the creation of a new criminal offence
that carried a fine of up to £20,000—members of the
Committee can see how serious we are about
this. Businesses
that offer sunbeds for use on their premises would be under a duty to
ensure that persons aged under 18 were not offered, did not use and did
not access their sunbeds, and a duty to ensure that persons aged under
18 were not present in the restricted zone. Having a restricted zone
makes the Bill workable in practice, as it would provide clarity about
where offences were being committed, if they were being committed. The
subsections of the clause make clear what would constitute a restricted
zone. My
hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North explained very well the
situation if there were such premises as the hon. Member for Boston and
Skegness described—I, too, am not aware of any; I do not know
whether the hon. Gentleman is. It is impossible to imagine
circumstances in which a gym, as described, would have a sunbed in the
corner and no private space in which to undress and dress. However, if
that were the case, putting screens around the area is all that would
be required, as my hon. Friend said. Therefore, the owner of such
premises would be in
compliance. It
is important for us to consider circumstances when the sunbed business
has done all that it can to comply. The hon. Member for Ribble Valley
mentioned young people looking older than their years If a young person
came up with a good quality, fake identity card, which was checked by
the business owner, it would be a reasonable defence that the owner had
not contravened the law. We recognise that by accident and despite all
best efforts, the odd person might slip through the net. The clause
recognises those who take every reasonable step to comply and, as my
hon. Friend said, such people can use it as a defence, if
appropriate. The
hon. Member for Boston and Skegness asked where we would make reference
to the supervision of premises. That will follow under regulations. If
the Bill receives Royal Assent, we will move quickly to consult on the
regulations, which are the right place to contain such
references—not in the Bill—as how they are made to work
is a matter of practicality. We shall return to that point under clause
4, where allowance is made for measures requiring supervision of the
use of commercial
sunbeds. I
have discussed the EU standard previously. It is the responsibility of
the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, so it is not
appropriate for such a measure to be included in a public health Bill.
As I said on Second Reading, I drew the concerns of the hon. Gentleman
to the attention of the Business Secretary, a matter to which I shall
return. The Committee might like to know that an enforcement regime is
in place, about which the Department of Health is in discussion with
BIS. Responsible operators would be expected to comply voluntarily with
the standard in any case. Such practice already takes place and,
although the concerns are real, unfortunately the Bill is not the right
instrument to tackle
them. The
hon. Gentleman talked about monitoring the ban. The Department is
responsible for monitoring compliance with the ban, and it will work
closely with other bodies. We shall also return to the matter when
discussing clause 7 because action enforcement is the responsibility of
local authorities. As we all realise, the lead time for the development
of skin cancer is too long to make it feasible in all honesty to
monitor compliance as we might usually do. However, I accept the need
to ensure that the provisions of the Bill are enacted and that will be
the responsibility of local authorities with which we shall work
closely. I hope the Committee will see fit to accept the
clause.
Julie
Morgan: We have had an interesting and helpful debate.
Important issues have been raised, most of which the Minister has
covered. We shall be returning to several of them under other clauses.
Enforcement is initially a matter for local authorities and it will be
carried out via routine visits under health and safety legislation.
Such matters will then be referred to the Department, so that it has an
overall
view. My
hon. Friend the Minister covered the EU regulations and the fact they
are the responsibility of another Department. The hon. Member for
Boston and Skegness also said that even if all salons adhered to the EU
opinion on the strength of sunbed lamps, without the Bill many salons
would still be able to allow children easy access to sunbeds and thus
put their health at risk. Another important point was the recognition
of the age of a young person. We will take that very seriously when we
undertake the consultation process when drafting the
regulations. Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
2 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
3Exemption
for medical
treatment Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill. 5.30
pm
Julie
Morgan: This is a short clause, which provides exemption
for medical treatment for under-18s. It is a sensible clause and will
make the Bill workable. There are clearly some instances where the use
of a sunbed, under strict supervision, is recommended by a health
professional to treat skin conditions such as psoriasis. Any treatment
must be under the supervision of a doctor and must be in a healthcare
establishment in the NHS or the private sector. COMARE, which has
already been mentioned a few times, and WHO recommend that medical
treatment should take place in medical settings under clinical
supervision. The clause will ensure that there is no loophole by which
young people can gain access to sunbeds under false
pretences. Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
3 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
4Power
to make further provision restricting use, sale or hire of
sundbeds Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Julie
Morgan: Again, this is an important clause because it
deals with the regulations. The clause allows regulations to be made to
support the aim of the legislation, which as we all know, is to prevent
the use of sunbeds by under-18s. It allows secondary legislation, by
Welsh Ministers in the Welsh Assembly and by Ministers in Westminster,
in three areas: supervision, use of sunbeds by under-18s in domestic
premises, and the sale and hire of sunbeds to persons under
18.
We know that
some salons are unsupervised and we know from research by Cancer
Research UK that 6 per cent. of 11 to 17-year-olds use sunbeds. As we
have so many Welsh Members here today, I will give the figure for
Wales, which is higher. Some 8 per cent. of children aged 11 to 17 have
used a sunbed in Wales. In the 15 to 17-year-old group, 11 per cent.
have used a sunbed. It is clear that younger children are using sunbeds
in salons.
Supervision
in salons is crucial, a point supported by WHO and COMARE. If a salon
has no members of staff, there is no one in place to check age and if
necessary to say no. As many of my colleagues are aware, the Welsh
Assembly’s Health, Wellbeing and Local Government Committee
recently conducted an inquiry into the use and regulation of sunbeds.
Not only did it recommend that under-18s should not be allowed to use
sunbeds, but also
that “facilities
provide full-time supervision by well-trained
staff”. It
considered evidence from one sunbed operator who argued that they were
able to identify the age of users remotely, via CCTV. We have already
had a discussion about how difficult it is to tell the age of young
people. The Committee considered that argument to be
“risible” and that it was difficult enough to tell
someone’s age, let alone if using CCTV. It is precisely for that
reason that licensed premises often require identification evidence
before serving alcohol and that issue has already been
raised.
Should the
Bill be enacted, I am pleased to confirm that the Welsh Minister for
Health and Social Services, Edwina Hart, is committed to bringing
forward regulations straight away to protect children in Wales. The
Secretary of State for Health also confirmed his intentions at the
Bill’s launch, to which my right hon. Friend the Member for
Walsall, South referred. We received an enormous amount of support. He
said that he would introduce regulations straight away to tackle
unstaffed salons once the Bill is
passed. The
Bill also ensures that, as part of the process of introducing
regulations, a consultation must occur involving all interested
parties. It is very important that that consultation take place. It is
a sensible way forward and the owners of businesses should have the
opportunity to make their views known. Ensuring that salons are
supervised may mean that extra staff have to be taken on. Although that
would provide job opportunities, there are also implications for the
salons and they must have every opportunity to put their views
forward.
Staff
supervision is important and, should the Bill pass, regulations would
be introduced, subject to consultation, to ensure that salons are
supervised. The regulations might be seen as a ban on coin-operated or
self-determined sunbeds. However, they will not create an explicit ban,
and before they are introduced, there must be consultation with
interested parties. However, they will drastically limit the use of
coin-operated
sunbeds. The
other power to make secondary legislation ensures that under-18s do not
use or are not offered the use of a sunbed by people who carry on
sunbed businesses from their homes, and prohibits or restricts the sale
or hire of sunbeds to under-18s. Subsections (3) and (4) ensure that
the consultation takes
place.
Mark
Simmonds: I thank the hon. Member for Cardiff, North for
her introduction to this part of the Bill. I want to raise
two or three points. She is absolutely right to emphasise the
importance of consultation, particularly with those legitimate
businesses that want to comply with the law and subsequent regulations
to ensure that everything is done safely and appropriately, and that
the Department understands the impact of subsequent regulations on the
viability or otherwise of particular businesses. However, I want to
press the matter a little
further. First,
is the hon. Lady saying that it is certain that subsequent regulations
will make unmanned sunbed salons illegal? If so, why is that not in the
Bill, because that is the right thing to do? Secondly, what is the
difference between “unmanned” and
“supervised”? “Supervised” implies that the
supervision could be external from the premises rather than internal,
and I would like to know whether there is a nuance, or whether I am
just being suspicious of the choice of
words. Another
issue is the time scale of the subsequent regulations. If the Bill is
enacted, as we all hope it is, it is unlikely that regulations would be
introduced during the lifetime of this Parliament, so there would be a
time gap. People under the age of 18 would be unable to hire a sunbed,
but they could buy one for their own use. If that is the
case—everyone agrees that we should ban under-18s not only from
using sunbeds in salons, but from buying them for their own
use—why is that not in the Bill? What is the importance and
necessity of the consultation for those two narrow
aspects? It
would be helpful to understand the Department’s thinking on
coin-operated sunbeds, and the hon. Lady was absolutely right to raise
that. Is the intention to make that illegal under the regulations, or
is it to consult the industry on the detail to ensure that in some
circumstances that is still allowed? I would like to know under what
circumstances coin-operated sunbeds will be allowed, because I believe
that they are one of the main problems that need to be sorted out, not
just for those under 18, but for those over
18.
Mr.
George: My attitude to legislation is scarred by my long
experience of the Private Security Industry Act 2001, which
was diluted and not properly enforced. Best intentions may be
undermined by an Administration with different perspectives from those
of a previous Administration, or the earlier Administration may change.
The words in the Bill cause me some concern. “May” make
provision is too flexible. “Will” would be better,
because “may” leaves a gap for someone who wishes to
dilute the
provision.
Subsection
(1)(a) states that
“the use of
sunbeds to which the business relates is supervised in such manner as
the regulations may
require”. We
do not know what the regulations are, but we all know, because we have
all been members of Committees dealing with regulatory measures, that
they often go through at a rate of knots, and that members of such
Committees do not always want to be members. Can the Minister assure
us, as far as she is able, that the impetus for the legislation, which
has been some time in coming, will be sustained? Will principles be
laid down for regulation and subsequent action by overstretched local
authorities and Government, because many redundancies will result from
people being turfed out of work? I hope it will be possible to stiffen
what is contained in the Bill to ensure that enforcement will be
serious and not perfunctory or
zero.
Gillian
Merron: The Government support the proposed
regulation-making powers contained in clause 4. Regulations made under
the clause will support the Government’s position, which is that
under-18s should be prevented from using or accessing sunbeds for
cosmetic purposes. However, we acknowledge the impact on the sunbed
industry, which is why mandatory consultation with interested parties
is the right thing to do.
The
regulations will require the supervised use of sunbeds and will
prohibit or restrict the sale of sunbeds to under-18s. As I said
earlier, regulations are right and proper, not least because of the
amount of consultation on the practicalities of the Bill, and that is
why regulations will be used to give effect to the Bill, as is normal.
We intend to carry out the consultations as soon as possible after the
Bill—as we hope—completes all stages in the House.
Importantly, as the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness inquired, we
will also carry out a full impact assessment before making the
regulations. I hope that the Committee will support the
clause.
Mark
Simmonds: Unusually, the Minister has not, I feel, given
adequate responses to the points that I raised. Of course consultation
is important. Of course it must be done with the relevant and
legitimate businesses. I want to understand the difference between
manned and supervised. That has not been explained. I want to
understand whether it is the view of the Government—it is
clearly the view of the hon. Member for Cardiff, North—that
unmanned salons, and coin-operated salons, should be made illegal under
the subsequent regulations. The Minister might say, “That is
part of the consultation process”, in which case we can conclude
only that it is not the intention of the Government under subsequent
regulations to make those two particular aspects illegal. As I said
earlier, if that is the case, it should be in the Bill and not left to
subsequent regulations.
| 
