Special Committee Factories Bill, 1954 debate -
Thursday, 3 Feb 1955

SECTION 52.

Mr. Larkin

I move amendment No. 34 :—

To delete sub-section (3), lines 40 to 47.

Amendment 34 is to delete sub-section (3) in which the Minister is given power, by regulation, to exempt factories from the provisions of the section, where there appears to be difficulty in obtaining an adequate supply of water or where accommodation is restricted. I am opposed to granting such power on these grounds, because it seems to me that if the provisions of the section are desirable in regard to the provision of washing facilities, that does not limit it to a question of piped or a running supply of water. We should not permit exemption merely on the grounds of difficulty in obtaining water supplies. There cannot be a factory anywhere where there is no water supply of any kind available, and if we are to exempt them also on the grounds that their accommodation is restricted, I think it is a very thin argument.

Mr. Norton

I am not very happy about the form of exemption myself, and the provision is included as a precaution. Section 52 deals with the provision of washing facilities. Sub-section (3) of that section provides:—

(3) The Minister may, by regulation, provide for the exemption of factories from any of the requirements of this section in cases where, by reason of the difficulty of obtaining an adequate supply of water, or the fact that accommodation is restricted and adequate and suitable washing facilities are otherwise conveniently available. . .

This amendment by Deputy Larkin seeks to delete the Minister's power of granting exemption. As this is a non-technical measure, it is not always possible to conceive how certain provisions can readily be applied to the majority of factories, where, in fact, the premises are in rather peculiar circumstances. It is a matter for consideration whether it is desirable to have this power applied only in these peculiar and exceptional circumstances. If the committee is satisfied that we should deprive the Minister of that power, I am perfectly satisfied.

Mr. Lemass

I think it is desirable to have the power of exemption, because the Minister might be in the position of having to connive at a breach of the Act, or take measures to close down a factory, and cause unemployment. We may assume that the power to exempt would not be used except where circumstances would justify it.

Mr. Norton

I do not think that any Minister likes giving persons exemption, unless he is satisfied it was impossible to compel them to comply with the provisions of the section. Then if the Minister thoughtlessly or willingly granted the exemption, the matter can be raised on the regulations by a motion in the House ; in other words, the Minister is made amenable for his actions in the House. This is just a question whether it is better to have the power to be used only in very exceptional circumstances or to connive at breaches of the Act.

Mr. Larkin

The Minister has two separate powers : one is to set a standard in relation to any class or description of factory and the other is the power of exemption. In principle, I am always against giving Ministers power of exemption and in this case it seems to me the reasons which can be advanced for examption in respect of this section must be exceptionally limited because we are not dealing here with the question of, say, piped water supply, drainage or sewerage. We are dealing with an adequate supply of water, which may be just contained in a vessel, and ordinary accommodation for washing. Quite clearly, if a factory cannot provide those it might be as well to put it out of business.

Mr. Lemass

A factory under this Bill can be a very small unit indeed.

Mr. Norton

A situation might arise, for example, where a factory had a normal supply of water, but due to flooding, burst pipes, an explosion, or anything else, that supply of water was suddenly cut off. In those circumstances, if the factory had not a supply of water available, they would be guilty of an offence under this section, but this power would enable the factory to secure exemption for a limited period and the responsibility could then be reimposed on the factory.

Mr. Larkin

It seems to me, with all due respect, that that is not the kind of grounds on which this exemption will be operated.

Mr. Norton

Frankly I hope I never have to operate it.

Mr. Lemass

It must be remembered that the Minister has to publish regulations, he has to wait for 21 days and if there is a burst pipe it would be a long time——

Mr. Norton

I will not express any regrets if this power is taken from me. I do not yearn for the retention of it. The only question is, is it desirable to have a provision giving power to cover these particular cases which may or may not arise. If the Minister grants the power the Minister can be made amenable on the floor of the House and I do not think any Minister, remembering that, will lightly give exemption. It must be borne in mind that it is difficult for the person to get the exemption. It is not as if he could write to the Minister and say : " I have no water. Please grant me an exemption." The whole procedure for making the regulations and raising objections has to be complied with and no doubt trade unions catering for the workers will be busy when that stage is reached.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Larkin

I move amendment No. 35:—

To add to the section a new sub-section as follows:—

(4) The use of common towels shall be prohibited, and where towels are provided they shall be individual cloth towels or paper towels.

This amendment is to extend and make more definite the provisions set out under sub-section (1) viz. that there should be adequate and suitable facilities for washing which would include soap and clean towels or other suitable means of cleaning or drying. The amendment provides that it shall not be a common towel and where towels are provided they should be either individual cloth or paper towels. There does not seem to be much sense in providing hygiene regulations if we are going to provide common towels when we recall some of the types of common towels we see.

Mr. Norton

The towel must be clean.

Mr. Larkin

There are varying standards of cleanliness.

Mr. Lemass

I am strongly opposed to this amendment. Paper towels are an invention of the devil and if you have separate towels they very quickly disappear from the factory.

Mr. Larkin

I gladly agree with you but I would even prefer to see the reference to towels deleted altogether because I do not believe they would be clean towels.

Mr. Norton

The only difficulty about an amendment of this kind is that everybody wants to encourage the highest possible standards of hygiene but there are practical difficulties involved. The idea in the amendment is, I know, good on health grounds but it is debatable if the country as a whole is sufficiently health-minded to accept such a provision. If individual hand towels were to be provided the employer would find it a costly business in relation to replacements and getting towels laundered and whether we agree with it or not the roller towel is still the rather common feature of factory and office life. In fact, the Board of Works provide roller towels for civil servants and Deputies who use the Parliament house are treated to the same concept of hygiene which is understood by the Board of Works.

Mr. Larkin

This Bill sets down the provision of soap and clean towels. Everybody is quite well aware that if it is left in that state you are not going to have clean towels. It is better not to have the provision at all than to put in a pious expression in the hope that they will be supplied.

Mr. Norton

There is a factory committee being established and here is a field to which they could usefully direct their attention. If the soap disappears with disconcerting rapidity or the towel is not laundered frequently enough, the factory committee has a function to discharge there and by the application of their energy to that problem you might in the course of time effect a remedy.

Mr. Larkin

You have seen wash-hand basins and lavatory basins disappear so you cannot be surprised if the soap and towel disappear.

Mr. Norton

In the long run, the most effective way is by a vigilant committee trying to build up a standard and trying to inculcate some standards of decent citizenship.

Mr. Larkin

The only point I see is that it is physically impossible to ensure that you will have clean towels if they are commonly used. I do not know that any factory committee would be able to set down a standard which they could stand over as the section is phrased at the moment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section put and agreed to.