---

Health Bill

A couple of points of interest have come up in this debate. First, if noble Lords will excuse me, I will put on one of my old hats—that of a trades union official. When there was a change of conditions of employment, it was always established that you had to consider whether there was any detriment to those involved. The amendment would not cause any detriment to the interests of the staff members. They have been working—and, indeed, are working—in clubs where smoking is allowed. If the amendment were passed, they would continue to work in such clubs. Other employees in other places would have what is held to be an improvement in their conditions. Nothing on earth prevents the employees in those private clubs, either individually or collectively, seeking to negotiate for the club to become a smoke-free area. They are not slaves; they are free to take their services anywhere and sell their services anywhere. Their conditions would not be made worse if the amendment were passed—not at all. There is no detriment whatever. Secondly, I do not want to mention Second Reading points but I must say that, as a lifelong non-smoker, I recently wrote to the Chief Medical Officer to suggest that, as some of the data on the dangers of so-called passive smoking have been disputed from time to time, a simple, straightforward, inexpensive, desktop exercise could be conducted that would shed light on the matter. I spent 17 years of my life on the flight decks of heavy transport aircraft. I was frequently the only non-smoker in the crew. Sometimes there were a couple of us, but it was rare that we did not have at least one smoker. We were confined in a relatively small space and we all breathed the same air. All our medical records over the whole of our flying careers are held by the Civil Aviation Authority. It would be simplicity itself to go back and look at those records to see whether there was a significantly worse record among the non-smokers who were passively smoking on the flight deck—year in, year out; day after day; night after night—than among the population in general who were not so exposed. The medical officer of health told me that he did not think it would be very useful—it would be difficult and he did not propose to take up the idea. I cannot help wondering why.