Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Warner (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 4 July 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health Bill.


Health Bill

My Lords, I do not have to explain it. I have already explained that second-hand smoke is a trigger for asthma. That is all we need to know in the context of this Bill. Second-hand smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals in the form of particles and gases. The WHO and the United States Environmental Protection Agency have both classified tobacco smoke as a known human carcinogen. We must remember that 85 per cent of second-hand smoke consists of invisible, odourless gases. It is absolutely essential to retain the Bill as it is to protect people in their workplaces. I can reassure the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, about Scotland. In Scotland all vehicles that are for use for work purposes by one or more persons must be smoke-free at all times. We have not modelled this piece of legislation on Scotland. We propose offering leeway for smoking in vehicles that are for the sole use of the driver and are not used for work purposes by anyone else as a driver or passenger. That is different in content from the Scottish position. The Government’s intention on smoke-free vehicles has been made absolutely clear. It is right to give workers who share a vehicle that same protection from second-hand smoke exposure as people who share other kinds of workplaces. I explain to the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, who raised the subject of lorry drivers with a bed in the back—as I believe he put it—that if the lorry is used by just one person, smoking would be allowed. However, if it is a workplace for more than one person, it would have to be smoke-free. We are absolutely consistent on that. One can see that the Government’s intention on smoke-free vehicles is entirely consistent with our approach towards smoke-free public places and workplaces. The amendment, as I believe I have made clear, would be totally unacceptable to the Government and could leave workers in vehicles at risk from the hazardous effects of second-hand smoke in the workplace, which is wrong in principle and wrong in practice when having regard to people’s health. The Government do not accept the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c146-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Costs Health hazards Drugs Labelling Medical treatments Motor vehicles Public places Prescription drugs Passive smoking Working conditions Smoking
Legislation
Health Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk