Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 45:"Page 7, line 3, leave out subsection (1) and insert—" ““(   )   For the purposes of this Chapter, ““enforcement authority”” means the local authority for the area in which it has responsibilities.”” The noble Lord said: The noble Lord, Lord Naseby, has had to leave the Committee for a while, so in his absence I will move the amendment. We have just had quite a long debate, discussing enforcement and who the enforcement authority is to be. Rather than state who are to be the enforcement authorities in the Bill, however, Clause 10(1) enables the appropriate national authority to make regulations designating the bodies, or descriptions of the body, which are to be the enforcement authorities. That seems very convoluted, hence this amendment introducing clarity to this part of the Bill. The Explanatory Notes state that the intention is that local authorities will be enforcement authorities, and that the officers will be environmental health officers. However, the clause allows additional or other arrangements to apply. It is simply not good enough that the enforcement issue should be so much in the air at this stage of the Bill. Parliament is surely entitled to know exactly who the enforcement authorities are before it passes the Bill. Whoever they may be, they should be entitled to know that they will be the enforcement authorities in order that they can prepare to do their job. That seems a completely reasonable request, but it is being opposed by the Minister, and will be again, no doubt, after I have sat down. Given that smoke-free provisions are likely to apply to vehicles as well as premises and other places, it is relevant to ask whether it is envisaged that parking and traffic wardens, for example, will have enforcement responsibilities. Their responsibilities have increased fairly recently. Are they to be further increased? Will they be consulted? Are they the sort of people who will be consulted by the Minister or his officials before decisions are taken on who shall be enforcement authorities? It is known that the police are most reluctant to be given responsibility for enforcement of the smoke-free provisions. I do not blame them. I listened to the last debate and what the noble Earl, Lord Howe, said about the difficulties of an enforcement officer going into a pub near closing time. Some ““brave”” people who may have drunk quite a quantity of alcohol may say, ““We are fed up with this law. We don’t like this law. We think that it is an infringement of our personal liberties and isn’t in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, so we will light up””. So they light up and the publican says, ““You can’t do that here. That’s not allowed. Are you not aware that I shall or could be fined £2,500 in order that you can light up your cigarette?”” They may say, ““Well, we are having a good time, but we need a fag after a drink. We love a fag with our drink and now we’re going to have one””. So what does the publican do? He sends for the enforcement officer. Where will the enforcement officer be? Presumably, all publicans will have a telephone number that they can call. It may be that the enforcement officer is on call, or he may not be on call. The publican will have to take a chance. How long will it take the enforcement officer to get to the pub? It takes about 10 minutes to smoke a cigarette. Will the enforcement officer arrive in 10 minutes so that he can tell these people—criminals—to put out their cigarettes? It will be too late. So what does he do? He may say, ““Who has been smoking in this pub? I have had a call out. Somebody has been smoking in this pub. Who is it?”” Will the smoker or smokers own up? I very much doubt it. The publican will have to say, ““It’s them, there””, and they may deny it. What happens then? Will the enforcement officer issue an ASBO? If he does, will it not perhaps cause a mêlée and fighting inside and outside the pub? This very difficult issue has not been properly considered yet. The ban may go down in Ireland. I am not sure that it will go down in the same way in this country. There are very real difficulties. In Scotland, special officers have been appointed generally as part of the environmental health officer team to police the smoking ban that it is now implementing. Given that enforcement carries costs, there are strong arguments on why the Bill should state specifically who are to be the enforcement authorities and for adequate financial provisions to be made that do not simply rely on income from the fixed-penalty regime. I know that the Minister will say, ““It’s alright chaps; don’t worry about it. We’ve got everything in hand and you don’t need to alter this clause. We shall see to it that everything is fine. We have consulted everybody and it’ll be alright on the night””. However, in passing legislation, that is not good enough for some of us. We like to see things on the face of the Bill. That is what I am asking the Minister to do. He may not be able to do it this afternoon, but I urge him to look further at these provisions to see whether he ought to reconsider what will happen and to come forward on Report with details of the enforcement authority. It is essential that we know that and the details of how the Bill will be enforced. I beg to move.