| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. I shall very briefly cover some of the points he made.
The Minister said that IPL machines run the risk of inflicting the same damage to the skin as lasers, but that is not my understanding. I have been advised very firmly that the risks from the use of a laser are very much greater and that the risk of an accident with an IPL machine is very slim indeed, providing that the operator is suitably trained.
The Minister mentioned the experience of the United States. I know that the industry was grateful that the department was able to make the concession that a medical practitioner need not supervise the operation of these machines. However, the fact that that concession has been made makes me wonder why the Minister drew the United States analogy at all, as officials were clearly satisfied that no medical expertise was necessary in operating the machines.
The Minister rightly said that, under the 1984 legislation, acute hospitals have been classified as nursing homes. I have personally viewed that as a quirk of history more than anything else. I am not sure whether it is a sufficiently good reason to classify IPL establishments as hospitals ab initio under these regulations, but I accept that it has been done for reasons of expediency and convenience.
I am a little surprised that, as I understood the Minister to be saying, because it did not know who to approach in the consultation exercise the department rather ran out of steam in trying to contact the companies involved. I should not have thought that the department was absolved of the need to conduct thorough and rigorous consultation when proposing to regulate, and I wonder what sort of precedent that sets for other sectors.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Earl for allowing me to intervene, which I
am not sure I am allowed to do when we are discussing regulations. What I was trying to say is that for the department this was very much a new territory and a new field. Of course, the department made every effort to consult the organisations that it considered represented the trade. Inevitably, in that situation some organisations may have been missed out. I did not seek to say that the department had not taken the matter seriously.
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am grateful for those comments. I understand the point the Minister has made. He suggested that someone who wished to hire or operate a machine for the first time after 1st April might find a way through one of the problems that I raised by means of a rent free period. I am not sure how much that would help someone who wanted to operate a machine for the first time after 1st April because, as I understand it, such operation would be illegal unless the application for the licence had been submitted prior to 1st April. Therefore, I am not quite sure what is—
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, what I was suggesting was that in the industry it is quite normal for a newcomer in the field to be given a moratorium before he or she has to start paying for equipment. That provides one way through the difficulty of a trade fair that is held in April. Given the financial arrangements I have mentioned, newcomers can still enter into agreements and apply for the relevant licence.
Earl Howe: My Lords, I, and, no doubt, the sector too, will take careful note of that suggestion. No doubt it will be followed through. I am grateful for the fact that the Minister and the department have given thought to the matter.
I am also grateful for the Minister's reply on the issue of dual registration. It is helpful that the department is looking at the issue of amending the London local authorities legislation. I also thank the Minister for clarifying, as far as he is able, the issue of full cost recovery and the department's intentions in that regard.
I have no doubt that the industry is prepared to accept the case for regulation in this context but I still feel that the lack of consultation initially—although the department has since entered into useful discussions with the sector—has created a system that is unclear and, in my view, anomalous. I hope that, despite the fact that these regulations will be put in place, the department will not close its mind to looking at these issues afresh. With that I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.
Travel Concessions (Eligibility) Bill [HL]
Returned from the Commons agreed to with a privilege amendment; the amendment was considered and agreed to.
- House adjourned at seven minutes before ten o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |