Clause 7 - Part 11 of the Housing Act 1985
Home Energy Conservation Bill
6:30 pm
Mr. Baron: I beg to move amendment No. 26, in page 4, line 17, at end insert,
'which shall include specific requirements relating to the provision, siting and maintenance of smoke alarms'.
I propose the amendment because proper attention must be given to the additional fire risks that are generally prevalent in HMOs. I can offer some approximate figures. More than 1.5 million people live in HMOs, and the detail of our research suggests that the fire risk for tenants in HMOs is greater than for those who live in houses occupied by a single household, however that is defined.
Research that Entec conducted for the Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions—in 1998, I think—identified several factors, in addition to the number of occupants, that influence the risk from fire in HMOs. They included the number of storeys—HMOs of three or more storeys posed a significantly higher risk—and the nature of the occupancy itself, as HMOs that house dependant or vulnerable persons pose a higher risk than those that house the able-bodied and cognisant. Another factor was the quality of the management of an HMO, and further factors related to internal design, such as the degree of self-containment of the units of accommodation, the number of escape routes, and their fire rating.
Research by the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions suggests that in many HMOs the risk of death from fire is very high. I will cite a couple of examples, although I am conscious that time is running out. Tenants in bedsit houses are six times more likely to die from fire than people in
houses occupied by a single household. Adults living in bedsit houses of three or more storeys are almost 17 times more likely to be killed in a fire than those living in single family houses. There are other examples on page 26 of the DTLR report on fire risk in houses in multiple occupation, but it is unnecessary to highlight them.
The findings seem to make sense. There are reservations about various statistics relating to fire hazards in HMOs, one factor being that legislation introduced in January 1997 removed from furniture the foam that gave off deadly poisonous gases. All furniture now in HMOs or in let property generally must comply with the latest fire regulations, so that furniture does not give off poisonous gases. Whatever the reservations about the figures, there is no doubt that the fire risk posed in HMOs is far greater than that in ordinary households.
Such a position is evidenced by visits in our constituencies to the many organisations that would be classified as HMOs, or buildings that contain many rooms, such as hostels, charity housing and refuges. It is reasonable to insist that all HMOs be fitted with smoke detectors. When considering fire safety requirements in any registration scheme, such as those that will be set up under clause 7, the siting and maintenance of smoke alarms should be part of the specific requirements relating to that provision. It is not as if I am talking about an expensive piece of kit. Smoke alarms are cheap to buy and to operate. I put it to the Committee that the amendment be accepted to ensure that as far as is practicable, the higher risk is removed.
As a landlord, I have fitted smoke detectors everywhere. Even though a fire might have been caused by a tenant, I could not have it on my conscience that a death had been caused because of the lack of a smoke detector, which is cheap to buy.
Mr. Alan Simpson: I have great sympathy with the hon. Gentleman's argument; the action that he has taken in respect of his property is laudable. However, I am not urging the Minister to make a commitment to accept his amendment. It is important that such issues are dealt with under the guidelines and directions that support the Bill. We want it to be strengthened not only in terms of smoke alarms, but through the guidance on fire precautions vis-à-vis sprinkler systems. We have heard dramatic evidence about the devastation that fire can cause that would not have been forestalled by the presence of smoke alarms alone. People throughout the country know the value of including the recognition of sprinkler systems in fire safety precautions. I ask the Minister to deal with that specific issue.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Swindon (Ms Drown) has undertaken much work into such systems. She has emphasised the importance of how much death and injury can be avoided by including sprinkler systems in the mainstream fabric of fire precaution regulations. I hope that the Minister will give some assurance that that, too, will be part of the regulatory framework that he aims to introduce.
[Mr. John Cummings in the Chair]