Vol. 378 No. 7
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will take immediate steps to ban the sale of furniture made from standard or high resilience (HR) polyurethane foam; and if he will take immediate steps to ensure that furniture containing such foam is not dumped from Britain on to the Irish market.
41.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will introduce a ban on the use of flammable foam in furniture making; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
46.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if it is intended to ban the use of flammable polyurethane foam in furniture in view of the proven risks from such foam; the measures, if any, the Government intend to take to ensure that furniture containing polyurethane foam, which has been banned in Britain, will not be dumped in this country; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 41 and 46 together.
I announced on Thursday, 25 February 1988 that new regulations will be introduced in early 1989 relating to the fire safety requirements for upholstered furniture. This decision was taken on the basis of a report which I requested from the National Standards Authority of Ireland last October and which I have now received. I asked for this report because of the need to keep our regulations up to date in this area of extreme danger potential. Technological advances in foam manufacture in recent years mean that we can now set higher levels of fire resistance for furniture on sale in this country.
The present regulations relating to the flammability of upholstered furniture have been in place since 1980. They require that from 31 December 1982 upholstered furniture must be resistant to smouldering cigarettes and either be flame resistant or carry a warning label indicating that it is not flame resistant.
These regulations were introduced at the same time as similar regulations in the UK. They have served, over the years, to reduce the risk of fires occurring in furniture, bearing in mind the state of technology, materials available and the cost of alternatives at that time.
Is the Minister aware that between 80 and 90 per cent of all furniture on sale to the public at present is filled with polyurethane foam? Is he also aware that homes can become toxic infernos when polyurethane furniture ignites? Can the Minister indicate what foam products he intends to ban in the regulations he has announced he intends to introduce? Could he state when those regulations will be introduced?
The United Kingdom and Ireland are two of the few countries which exercise stringent controls, far more stringent than the other member states, in this area. In the United Kingdom a number of deaths occurred over the Christmas period and there was a certain amount of media attention. As a result the United Kingdom authorities announced they would be introducing new legislation dealing with foam filled furniture and mattresses from the end of February 1989. We are aware that there are polyurethane materials being used at present which are flammable and dangerous. It is estimated that 90 per cent of furniture on sale is filled with polyurethane foam. While the increasing use of this relatively cheap material since the fifties has brought comfortable upholstered furniture within the reach of many people who could not previously afford it, nonetheless it is quite dangerous.
The type of regulations being introduced here will be in line with those in the United Kingdom. We will be banning the use of high resistance foam and only combustion modified high resistance foam will be permitted.
When will our regulations be introduced? The United Kingdom regulations will come into force at the end of February 1989. Is it merely a coincidence that the Minister took action in this area six weeks after the United Kingdom authorities announced the action they were taking? What steps does the Minister intend to take to warn the general public in this country of the dangers posed in 90 per cent of homes by the presence of both standard quality foam and the high resistance foam which he now intends to ban?
The Deputy has asked a series of supplementaries and I will try to reply to all of them. If I omit any I have no doubt he will let me know.
What is the date?
It is incorrect for the Deputy to say we acted after the United Kingdom. We commissioned a report by the National Standards Authority of Ireland in October last, which anteceded the statement made by the United Kingdom Government, in the light of the information available on the possible dangers of the polyurethane furniture which was available here. The United Kingdom announcement was made in the light of the tragedies which occurred over the Christmas period. We had acted much earlier and the announcement I made last week was as a result of the report commissioned last year.
As regards the timing of the introduction of the mandatory regulations, it is appropriate that the regulations to be introduced here and in the United Kingdom should be similar. It would be inappropriate that there should be dumping from the United Kingdom on the Irish market and vice versa. Their regulations will come into force at the end of February 1989 and we will time the introduction of our regulations so that they will more or less coincide with what is happening in the United Kingdom.
Will the timing coincide? Will we also introduce regulations at the end of February?
The timing of the introduction of the regulations in both countries will more or less coincide.
They either coincide or they will not.
Deputy McCartan.
If they do not coincide, furniture will be dumped here——
I am calling Deputy McCartan. Deputy Shatter has a tendency to ignore the Chair.
In the context of the Minister referring to existing legislation as being the code of strict enforcement, is he aware of a report in the national newspapers last Sunday that a spokesman for the IIRS indicated that not one test was carried out by that institute since the coming into operation of the existing regulations and that, in addition, upwards of 40 per cent of all furniture does not pass the flame resisting test and that very little furniture carries the necessary warning label? The Minister would have to concede that that is the position.
Brief questions, please.
It is a rare event to see these warning labels. Does the Minister envisage increasing the personnel in his Department to deal with the policing of the existing and new regulations when they come into force?
As regards any statements made by individuals representing any organisations, I am not responsible for them. What was the Deputy's second question?
It would appear that the regulations which require the furniture to carry warning labels are not being enforced.
According to the 1982 regulations furniture must pass two tests. One is the smoulder test and the other is the match ignitability test. The furniture has to pass the first test but it may not necessarily have to pass the second test. In other words, an item of foam filled furniture may be ignitable by a match under the present regulations but a label must be attached by the manufacturers before it is offered for sale. I am aware that the type of labels being used for this purpose at present can be easily detached. This may happen but I have no information that it has.
My third question asked if the Minister envisaged increasing the personnel in his Department to police the existing and new regulations to avoid dumping. This is very important.
When they come into force the mandatory regulations will ensure that there are permanent nondetachable labels on the solid part of the furniture so that the consumer will know exactly what he is buying and with what tests the furniture complies. As regards dumping, this will be under the control of the office of the Director of Consumer Affairs. At present there are seven inspectors who will ensure that furniture which was sold, assembled or manufactured in this country may not be sold, assembled or manufactured if it does not comply with our regulations.
Are there any EC proposals for regulations governing foam in furniture? If so, are their standards as high as those which will be in the mandatory regulations to which the Minister referred? If not, is there a danger that our regulations might be struck down as being inconsistent with a fully free internal EC market?
I am not aware of any EC regulations but I can assure the Deputy that from my information, the United Kingdom, Ireland and France are the only European countries with any legal controls over the fire safety of furniture. The regulations as they obtain here and in the United Kingdom are far more stringent than those in any other European country or indeed in any other country in any part of the world.
Does the Minister not agree it would be desirable that there should be EC-wide regulations in order that there would not be constraints on trade within the Community in this obviously desirable area?
Obviously it would be most desirable, since we are an active participating member of the EC, that there would be uniformity of regulations right across the board particularly in relation to something as serious and important to people's lives as dangerous furniture which might be flammable and cause loss of life. Obviously it is very important. We will ensure that the regulations we will introduce will be stringently observed and that controls will be instituted to ensure there is no infringement of those regulations.
I will put three brief questions to the Minister. Is he aware that the English regulations will provide for a lighted match test or open flame test? Will he say whether our regulations will so provide? In the context of the stringency of our regulations, will the Minister say whether he has any intention of introducing an amendment to the Industrial Research and Standards Act, 1961 under the terms of which a breach of the current regulations, or of the new ones the Minister is proposing, could result in a fine of £100 only being imposed whereas the fine imposed at present in England is £2,000 and they are talking about reviewing their legislation? Will the Minister agree that the penalties to be imposed under this legislation could render the regulations about which he is talking meaningless unless we introduce reforming measures here?
With new technology available there is now foam-filled furniture available which is not ignitable; that was introduced on the market last year. I might add that the increased cost will be minimal compared with that obtaining at present. I believe that the penalties should be strict and sufficiently severe to ensure that the regulations are not infringed.
We must move on to questions nominated for priority, Question No. 58.
Will the Minister be introducing legislation to impose stricter penalties?
On a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle, may I draw your attention to the fact that the Minister for Industry and Commerce, like every other Minister, comes into the House once every few weeks? There were 50 questions down to the Minister today of which four only have been answered.
That is hardly a point of order, Deputy Keating.
It is, if you will bear with me for a few moments; I have not delayed the House too long today. Four of those questions have been answered, not one from a party spokesperson. I am suggesting, with respect, a Cheann Comhairle, that the system of Question Time we now have is a farce if that is the position and I would ask you to have raised at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges changes in that system. May I also appeal to you to apply the same standards of discipline——
Members can take the initiative in regard to such matters themselves or through their appropriate representative on that committee.
But it also depends on you, a Cheann Comhairle, to maintain discipline in this House.
Question No. 58, please.
To have four questions answered once every three or four weeks is not adequate in the area of industry and commerce.
I am calling Question No. 58.
Before going to questions nominated for priority I want to inform you that I do not want a written reply to Question No. 12 on today's Order Paper as I want the Minister to account personally to this House as to why he is proceeding with this soap manufacture which is doing grave damage to our image abroad.
I am calling Question No. 58.
I will be delighted to do so if I get time.
It is obvious that supplementaries were being encouraged on the far side of the House——
I have called Question No. 58. Will somebody please respond.
