Proceeding contribution from Lord Naseby (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health Bill.
Health Bill
moved Amendment No. 12:"Page 4, line 38, leave out from ““signs”” to ““are”” in line 39 and insert ““comprising the internationally recognised no-smoking symbol””" The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment is clear; it is about signage. It proposes that those places that must show signs under the Bill just need to show the international no-smoking symbol. I asked the Minister in Committee to check the situation in Europe, and I imagine that he has that information to hand. It will be interesting to hear how much signage is required elsewhere in the world. Secondly, I asked him in Committee to check the situation in those countries that have dual languages or large ethnic-minority communities in certain parts, and whether there are any requirements for language provision. I am looking forward to hearing the answer to that as well. For 20 years I was actively involved in the advertising world, for most of that time in a pretty senior capacity. The one thing that you learn about communication is that the more notices you put up, the less likely they are to be read. I have looked at the provisions in the consultation document, such as providing a telephone number. We all know what happens when you ring a telephone number out of hours; and most people would be in a pub or a restaurant so they would presumably be ringing out of hours. They would get an answering machine, they would have to push several buttons, and they would not reach anyone at the end of the line. The whole thing is an absolute farce. If you have a major complaint to make, you ring during office hours and you make it directly. I see no objection to having a notice on all doors; I can understand why that provision is there. Frankly, the rest is totally unnecessary. Unless the Minister can give your Lordships clear evidence that the rest of Europe has shown a great need for the plethora of signs proposed, it seems much more sensible to accept my amendment. The Minister would find praise from all parts of the country—smokers and non-smokers—not least from people in the trade who would have to stump up the money to provide all the signs. For once, he might just be a hero. I am looking forward to a positive response to the amendment. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 683 c614-5
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Age Business Health hazards Motor vehicles Public places Passive smoking Working conditions Sales Young people Warnings Smoking
- Legislation
- Health Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:42:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_330548
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_330548
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_330548