Mr.
George: It is possible if one has not sought to take a
serious view of this Bill to think that it is pretty manageable and
pretty understandable. It is all about stopping those under 18 going
into salons. But the more one reads about this area of policy, the more
one realises how complicated it is. Therefore a public health officer
who has not dealt with this issue before will not be able to meet the
requirements of even a short Bill like this. I was wading through the
documents and it is worse than doing O-level chemistry; not that I ever
did. Oh I did, yes. I think I failed. The 13th report of the Committee
on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment is very
complicated.
I should like
some assurances. When one is dealing with enforcement, there will be a
power to prosecute. I have mentioned the security industry
authority. For a long time the guy who was responsible for enforcement
said—I was at a conference where he said this— that he
did not believe in prosecution. There are some cases where a tap on the
wrist or a fine will not be enough. There will be some cases where
something stronger must be done. Enforcement should have a high set of
sanctions. Enforcement by local authorities should involve those who
have a competence—I am sure they do—and the
training.
What thought
has been given in the Minister’s Department to the standards
that will be need to be attained by the officers who will look around
and
enforce? Is there any idea yet of training courses put on by different
organisations? Is there any indication that those who are going to have
this quite onerous responsibility have had the training before they can
go out and enforce what they will be legally empowered to do? It might
not look too complicated and it might look as though this is pretty
simple, but I suspect that some elements of it will require something
more. I am not suggesting a sub-specialism or that every local
authority has to have somebody with a masters in this area of policy,
but I just want to be certain that consideration is being given to
ensure that those who do this job have the qualifications, the
experience and the learning to do
it. Gillian
Merron: For the Bill to be effective it has to be enforced
properly. We believe that local authorities are well placed to
authorise officers to enforce the provisions of the Bill in their area.
My hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli makes good points about the
support for the Bill from young people themselves. She said that good
quality enforcement is about good quality understanding and support
from the public. I believe that the Bill will have
that. To
answer the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness, no notice period is
required. However, if entry is not given voluntarily, a justice of the
peace warrant is needed. This is an on-notice application, although
there are circumstances where notice of application for warrant is not
given, in other words when it would defeat the very object of the
Bill.
Perhaps I can
reassure my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, South. Standards
will be set by local authorities and their representative bodies which
we work very closely with. My hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North
has done so too. However, if we get to that stage, the Department of
Health plans to produce guidance to assist enforcement.
It is
interesting to note that France has had a mandatory registration scheme
since 1998, and that 80 per cent. compliance has been achieved. Given
the combination of matters that will go on, and the awareness of the
communities in which operators are based, we should be realistic about
the challenge. We certainly do not expect a masters degree or a
doctorate in order to ensure compliance.
Julie
Morgan: I wish to add to what the Minister said and
respond to the queries raised.
Entry to
commercial premises is already included in health and safety
legislation. The warrant allows entry at all reasonable times. It is up
to the local authority to determine the most appropriate person and the
best use of resources. It could be environmental health officers, as
they already visit suntan premises for health and safety compliance
checks. That position was suggested by the Local Government
Association.
Enforcement
officers are trained to apply a wide range of legal requirements.
Evidence is generally provided by the Department with responsibility.
Additional training will not be a major issue, but the Minister has
already covered that point.
Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
7 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clauses
8 and 9 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
10Regulations:
general Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Julie
Morgan: Clause 10 contains further provisions regarding
the regulation-making powers. It was said on Second Reading that
£20,000 was a stiff penalty. I reiterate that that is
the maximum penalty. Often a lower amount will be charged, but I
imagine that the £20,000 will act as a deterrent to those who
might not adhere to the provisions.
Mark
Simmonds: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for highlighting
that point.
I wish to
make two or three quick points on this clause. First, I presume that
the maximum fine of £20,000 may be for repeat offenders rather
than first-time offenders. Clarification would be useful. Secondly, the
power to make the regulations is exercisable by statutory instrument.
Will that be by affirmative or negative resolution procedure?
Thirdly,
subsection (2)
states: “Regulations
under this Act may—
make different
provisions for different cases or different areas”.
What on earth does that
mean? It seems to include every possible option for future variance in
the regulations that may apply. Some clarification on those points
would be helpful.
Gillian
Merron: We believe that the clause is necessary in order
to prevent officers of a company from hiding behind their company so as
to escape prosecution. The parliamentary procedure is set out in clause
11. I hope that that helps the Committee.
Mark
Simmonds: While I am still on my feet, I wonder whether
the Minister might find the inspiration to explain what subsection
(2)(a) means—or will the hon. Member for Cardiff, North explain?
Making different provisions for different cases or different areas
seems a very loose catch-all provision.
Julie
Morgan: I go back to the fine, the first point raised by
the hon. Gentleman. The £20,000 maximum is a standard level for
the magistrates court and can be found in similar legislation on health
and safety and food safety. It will rarely be imposed, as a
proportionate application is required.
The
regulations are dealt with in clause 11, so perhaps we can look at that
again when we reach that clause.
Mrs.
James: I understand that in Scotland the maximum rate is
£4,000, and I welcome the fact that the maximum, I presume, for
repeat offending is £20,000, because that will truly be a
deterrent and remind businesses that the matter is serious and that
there are serious consequences. I welcome the £20,000
maximum.
Gillian
Merron: I feel inspired and so perhaps can now assist the
hon. Member for Boston and Skegness. The reference to different areas
allows for regional
variation and variation in respect of Wales, as different cases could
relate to different sorts of sunbed, for example those for sale or
hire. I hope that that is helpful to him.
Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
10 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
11Regulations:
control by Parliament or National Assembly for Wales
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Julie
Morgan: All regulations under clause 4 need to be laid in
draft and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament and the
National Assembly for Wales. They are subject to the affirmative
resolution procedure. Regulations under clauses 5 and 6 are subject to
affirmative resolution procedures where they create offences. In all
other circumstances it is negative resolution.
Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
11 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clauses
12 to 14 ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Schedule
1 agreed
to. Question
proposed, That the Chairman do report the Bill to the
House.
Julie
Morgan: I thank everyone for today’s productive
discussions. We have covered some important points. This legislation is
important and, as many have said, long overdue. I hope that we will
have the support of all parties to make it
law.
Mark
Simmonds: Once again, I congratulate the hon. Member for
Cardiff, North on her excellent piloting of the Bill through Committee
and the Minster on the thorough way she has answered the queries and
questions raised today. I will make one final point. The Minister is
aware, because I have talked to her privately, of my nervousness about
the anticipated cost of the Bill for local authorities, which is
detailed in the impact assessment with a total of £88,000 for
all local authorities in England and Wales. There needs careful
monitoring to ensure that that assessed cost is accurate. I hope that
the officials in the Department will look closely at that, and if it is
much greater that anticipated it needs to be brought back before some
part of Parliament to ensure that it can be discussed
properly.
Peter
Bottomley: I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for
Cardiff, North on successfully bringing the Bill through Committee. I
also thank the Minister and, through her, her officials. It would be
useful if most colleges had the chance to read the impact assessment as
though it was an economic study, and they would learn a great deal on
the health advantages as well.
Mr.
George: It has been a delight to serve on this Committee.
It has been swift and consensual. My only request to the Opposition is
that they scour the programmes of the Commonwealth Parliamentary
Association, the Inter-Parliamentary Union and all other
inter-parliamentary assemblies to ensure that their Members who may
seek to be obstreperous are gainfully employed during the further
stages of the Bill. If the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness needs
advice on names, I am more than prepared to offer a few to him. Apart
from that, this has been a good experience. We have done good work and
I congratulate all those who have been involved in this endeavour so
far. Mrs.
Betty Williams (Conwy) (Lab): May I too congratulate my
hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North? I have nothing to add. I
came here having read the Bill. I know how diligent she has been in
preparing the Bill with the assistance of my hon. Friend the Member for
Swansea, East. I congratulate her on getting the Bill so far, and I
hope and pray that the whole House will support it without
delay.
Gillian
Merron: It has been a pleasure to serve under your
chairmanship this afternoon, Mr. Betts, and with colleagues
on all sides. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff,
North. In preparation for today, I suggested that she regard herself as
the Minister for the Bill. I think she has acquitted that role
beautifully. [ Hon. Members: “Hear!
Hear!”] I am full of admiration, particularly for her
explanation of parliamentary procedure. I have learned something
myself. I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea,
East, who has allowed us to get to this point. I thank all Committee
members and all other hon. Members who have supported the
Bill. It
would be appropriate to write to the hon. Member for Boston and
Skegness with regard to the figure and I am happy to do so. I will
outline for him some of the assumptions and give some background. I
assure him that we will continue to work with LACORS to monitor the
cost. We have worked closely with it to
date. I
am delighted that we have successfully concluded today’s
proceedings and I hope that we will see the Sunbeds (Regulation) Bill
become
law.
Julie
Morgan: Briefly, on the point raised by the hon. Member
for Boston and Skegness on costs, we have specific costings from
LACORS, which is supporting the Bill and is part of the Local
Government Association. Those are based on the number of estimated
visits. A lot of that work is taking place. Scotland did not put any
additional costs in for the work relating to its legislation and
Northern Ireland, which is consulting at the moment, has not put any
money in. I think that a lot of this work is
embedded. Question
put and agreed
to. Bill
accordingly to be reported, without
amendment. 6.17
pm Committee
rose.
| 
