Health Bill

I am grateful, Lord Chairman. I do not want to pick up the amendments we have just dealt with, because we have probably exhausted them for the moment. I want to pick up one key point: we have had less today than on Second Reading, but we have still had a lot of statistics quoted. I remember people in the Chamber saying on a number of issues, ““Well, this survey comes from this source, and is therefore bound to be skewed towards industry””—or commerce, or whoever produced it, or consumers. From my—and, I hope, their—perspective, I hope that the Government recognise that the key source of evidence must be the Office of National Statistics, which comes with no axe to grind one way or the other. The starting point remains their survey of July 2004. That report on smoking behaviour and attitudes said that around 65 per cent of people would like restrictions on smoking; that is the basic parameter. Asked what sort of restrictions they would like to see, however, only 31 per cent wanted a complete ban. Most people opted for separate smoking and non-smoking areas: 5 per cent believe that smoking should be permitted throughout, and 73 per cent in the last major survey considered that there should be smoking and non-smoking areas. The Government are going against the report, and I could quote from the Standing Committee in the other place which agreed with it. It has now changed its mind—I suppose that is the privilege of Governments. Currently, however, we have no evidence from the Office of National Statistics, or any independent body, that the public’s attitude has significantly changed since then. The Minister has stood up several times and said that there is clearly a view in favour of this, that and the other, but he does not give the sources. If the sources are given, they have a particular axe to grind. I have a proposal which I hope the Minister will take seriously. This is an annual survey, published in July. The basic data from the Office of National Statistics must have been collected by now. If it is not possible at this Committee stage, it certainly ought to be possible for us to have that data by Report. It is not too much graft for the Office of National Statistics. The data must be there; it is a matter of correlating and publishing it. Then we can all be better informed. If there has been a significant shift, as the Minister suggests, the evidence will be there and I will be the first to concede. If, on the other hand, that shift is not there, then the public has a right to know that. I put that proposition to the Minister, and hope that he will take it in the genuine sprit in which it is meant.