Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Walton of Detchant (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health Bill.


Health Bill

My Lords, I confess that as a lover of the more delicate nuances of the English language, I was a little dismayed earlier when the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, accused me of using sloppy terminology. At least he did not go as far as Disraeli, who referred to Gladstone as someone who was inebriated by the exuberance of his own verbosity. I confess that in referring to the report of the noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, I should have used a word a little less pejorative than ““inconceivable””. As I said at the time, I believe that it is remarkable—in fact, astonishing—that, in talking about the effects of second-hand smoke, a report produced by such an outstanding committee of your Lordships’ House should include the remark,"““the main harm, if there is one””." Today we have heard much about the effects that second-hand smoke may have on those who are exposed to it. The scientific evidence is incontrovertible. In response to what the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, said, there are more than 50 peer-reviewed publications in major journals, many of them supported by very well organised statistical evidence.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
683 c561 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Clubs Buildings Health hazards Exemptions Licensed premises Public places Passive smoking Working conditions Restaurants Smoking Ventilation
Legislation
Health Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk