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

SECTION 32.

Mr. Larkin

I move amendment No. 24:—

Before sub-section (8) to insert a new sub-section as follows:—

(8) Where a hoist or lift is not intended for carrying persons and does not comply with the provisions of the preceding sub-section it shall be an offence under this Act to permit a person or persons to be so carried in such hoist or lift.

This amendment is similar to one which I have later dealing with the question of lifting machines. The section provides that certain safeguards be adopted in regard to hoists and lifts and also declares that there shall be a difference between hoists and lifts intended for carrying goods and for carrying persons. I think it should be clearly stated that it would be an offence to permit the carrying of persons in hoists or lifts which are not complying with the statutory provisions in regard to carrying persons, in order to make it quite definite and not just a negative matter. The matter arose in my mind more in regard to the question of lifting machines because I have come across cases of men being lifted in the buckets of cranes which seems to me to be highly dangerous; but when I examined the section it seemed desirable to put in a similar provision to prohibit the carrying of persons in lifts which are quite clearly intended not to carry persons.

Mr. Lemass

It seems to me to be a reasonable provision.

Mr. Norton

Sub-section (7) of Section 32 lays down additional requirements in relation to hoists and lifts which are used for carrying passengers, whether carried together with goods or not. It is therefore an offence to carry passengers in any lift which does not comply with the provisions of sub-section (7), and we feel therefore that the suggested new section is unnecessary in view of the provisions already in sub-section (7).

Mr. Lemass

That is possibly correct as a legal interpretation of the section, but it is not very clear and it is better to have it clear.

Mr. Norton

Our advice on the matter is that it is covered by sub-section (7).

Mr. Larkin

What I had in mind was that, in the case of a hoist or lift not intended for carrying passengers, it should carry clearly a definite notice that the hoist was not to be used for carrying persons. Anybody who knows ordinary industrial life knows how common it is for persons to take a short cut, not only in the case of lifts and hoists but in the case of other even more dangerous means, and I think it would be desirable to make it quite clear that there is a clear distinction between a hoist for goods and a hoist for passengers.

Mr. Norton

We can have a look at it.

Mr. Lemass

An amendment of sub-section (6) would cover it.

Mr. Norton

We can examine it from the point of view of whether the best way of dealing with the matter is to insist on the thing being labelled: " Not to be used for passengers."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 32 agreed to.

Section 33 agreed to.