Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from John McDonnell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 24 February 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Workplace Temperatures.


Workplace Temperatures

My hon. Friend makes a valuable point. The reason for this debate is to secure clarity in our regulations. There is greater clarity in other parts of Europe, with maximum ranges of temperatures being set for particular industries, but we do not have that here. I shall explain the current regime and its weaknesses. We should be clear about what we seek. It is not about setting a maximum temperature above which an industrial or commercial process should end. It is about setting a temperature above which the employer should take action to overcome the problem. My hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Kelvin Hopkins) gave a good example, which was the supply of water. Ventilation is another. I have raised the matter before, but a cretin—I can only describe him thus—attacked me in the media, saying that we were trying to prevent people from working in the sun or in hot conditions. Far from it: we were trying to keep people at work, but to ensure that sufficient compensatory action was taken to prevent them becoming too hot and suffering health problems as a result.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
506 c76WH 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Codes of practice Accidents Health and safety Health and Safety Executive Hazards Prosecutions Monitoring Working conditions Temperature
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk