Health Bill [HL]

I thank the noble Earl, Lord Howe, for listening carefully to the concerns of small businesses. After all, many of them are family businesses, and the welfare of their children and their economic well-being is important too. It is quite right to listen very carefully to those newsagents. I listened very carefully to what the noble Earl said about the evidence in this matter, and it certainly makes me want to look again at it. I also listened very carefully to my noble friend Lady Young, who spoke about priorities and what is at stake. I was grateful that the noble Earl had taken the trouble to talk to Professor Hastings, whose presentation I found very impressive. He said that 70 per cent of those under 20 who have a child are smokers and that 40 to 50 per cent of them are smokers while they are pregnant. That is an extraordinary figure, but it reflects the fact that most of those under 20 year-olds will be from the most deprived communities. Eighty per cent of smokers start before the age of 18; as a smoker, I started at the age of 15. So the preponderance of smokers start before the age of 18. The most vulnerable young people are the most likely to be influenced into starting smoking. For instance, if a woman under the age of 20 smokes in the course of her pregnancy, her child may be born prematurely or underweight and there is a higher risk of disability. So we must weigh up the well-being of the small businesses involved and think carefully about the evidence. We have to think about the terrible consequences for children if they get drawn into smoking. My noble friend Lady Young made a strong point, but the evidence to which the noble Earl refers reminded me that in children's homes and provision for looked-after children, we often talk about needing an evidence base before we act and introduce new policy. I was struck by an academic, a pedagogue from Germany who came to this country, who said to me, "It is wonderful that you have so much evidence here about the outcomes for children in care. You know so well how they end up; we do not have this evidence in our country". I thought to myself, "We know how poorly they do; and it seems that they do far better in your country". The situation is different in Denmark and Germany. Only about 20 per cent of staff in our children's homes have a degree-level qualification, which contrasts with 90 per cent in Denmark. They do not necessarily know how well those children are doing, but they seem to be doing the right thing by them. One always wants as much and as robust evidence as possible when making policy decisions of this importance, but one also has to bear in mind the risks and the possible consequences. There are certain risks that one wants to avoid so much that one will take measures that one may not be 100 per cent confident in because the possible harm is so awful. I am not expressing myself very well; I apologise. I shall probably save more remarks on that for another time, but, as I said, I am very concerned. I see this as an important measure to protect children. It is an important welfare measure. I recognise that it needs to be considered very carefully. From my point of view, I emphasise that this is an important step forward in child protection.