View report page

27
at present performed by the sanitary staff of local authorities in relation to retail bakehouses
under Section 102 of the Act of 1901." The proposals in the Factory Bill go directly against
this movement.
No saving effected by new proposals.
It has been stated that the handing over of the duties hitherto carried out by Sanitary
Inspectors to Factory Inspectors is designed to prevent duplication of inspection work which
is stated to cause needless expense and trouble. It is difficult to conceive that such statements
can be justified; the work is carried out by an existing sanitary staff; no new duties are
imposed by the Factory Bill on the existing staff as far as is known; no new sanitary staff
is wanted. We have worked out that only 13 per cent. of the inspections made by the Sanitary
Inspectors in this Borough would be affected; there is no question of lessening the cost of
sanitary inspections in this Borough. At present the only expense involved is the cost of very
infrequent letters from the Factory Inspectors stating that they have found an infringement
of a sanitary regulation and calling the attention of the Public Health Department to the
matter.
Efficiency of service by Sanitary Inspectors.
No complaints generally have been raised as to the visits of Sanitary Inspectors who,
from their long experience of the work, have been able to form practical judgments of the
various requirements under the Acts so that the work can be carried on in the spirit rather
than in the letter of the law. On the contrary, there is reason to believe that employers in
the district as regards such matters as sanitation would prefer that the local authority
supervised them rather than a Central Body.
I recommend: —
(a) "That the attention of the Minister of Health be directed to the proposals contained
"in the Factories (No. 2) Bill, 1926, relative to the sanitary control of workshops and factories
"and he be informed that in the opinion of the Council existing powers of control should
"continue to be a responsibility of sanitary authorities."
(b) "That a copy of the above resolution be forwarded to the Corporation of the City of
"London, the Metropolitan Borough Councils, the Metropolitan Boroughs Standing Joint
"Committee, the Municipal Corporations Association and the Loudon Chamber of Commerce,
"and that they be asked if in agreement therewith to take similar action."
The Public Health Committee agreed with the foregoing recommendations
and at its meeting on the 24th November, 1926, the Council adopted the following
recommendation:—
"That the attention of the Minister of Health be directed to the
proposals contained in the Factories (No. 2 Bill, 1926, relative to the
sanitary control of workshops and factories and he be informed that, in
the opinion of the Council, existing powers of control should continue to
be a responsibility of sanitary authorities."
Copies of the foregoing resolution were forwarded to the Minister of Health,
the Corporation of the City of London, the Metropolitan Borough Councils, the
Metropolitan Boroughs Standing Joint Committee, the Municipal Corporations
Association and the London Chamber of Commerce.
At the date of preparation of this report replies have been received from 17
Metropolitan Boroughs, 13 of whom adopted a similar resolution, three referred
the matter to the Metropolitan Boroughs' Standing Joint Committee and one took
no action because the Bill was not being proceeded with in the, then, current
session of Parliament. It would appear that progress of the measure is likely to
be further postponed, but it is essential that, in the meantime, opportunity should
be taken by local authorities to express their view that there should be no curtailment
of their powers and duties in connection with the sanitary supervision of
factories, workshops and workplaces.