Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Sir Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of a national accident prevention strategy.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. Today, I want to draw the House’s attention to what can only be described as a silent and spiralling crisis in our country: the devastating human cost of preventable accidents. This is not a new issue, but it is getting worse and, crucially, it is still not given the level of sustained national attention that its scale demands. Too often, people think of accidents as tragic misfortune, but they are often ordinary moments: a fall at home, a collision on the road, an accident at work, a lapse in safety in a familiar environment.
Every Member here will recognise the pattern: we hear it in our advice surgeries, we receive the letters and we take the calls. We meet parents who have lost children, spouses who have lost partners and children who have lost a parent in circumstances that are sudden, awful and preventable. Towards the end of last year, following two road fatalities in the royal town of Sutton Coldfield in our community over the course of a week and the drowning of a teenager in Sutton park, I had the valuable experience of meeting a long-standing resident of Royal Sutton Coldfield, Becky Hickman, who is the chief executive officer of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and has championed accident prevention at the national level for over 20 years. Indeed, she is in the Public Gallery today.
One of those horrific accidents took place on Friday 22 August last year, when, tragically, 21-year-old Natasha Thorp was struck by a car on Brassington Avenue in my constituency and died shortly afterwards. I have had the privilege of getting to know her family a little and of joining Natasha’s father and other members of her family at the recent installation of a memorial bench in Sutton Park overlooking Blackroot pool. It is hard to describe the life-changing trauma they have suffered, but they are not alone.
RoSPA and I welcome the Department for Transport’s new road safety strategy, but it is a small part of a much bigger issue and strategy. Road traffic accidents are sadly not isolated events, and accidental deaths and injuries do not only happen on the roads. Tragedies can occur at home, at work and when out in open spaces.
Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)
One of the gaps that we consistently see is in water safety, where interventions are often reactive rather than preventive. Following the tragic death of a young boy in a reservoir local to me in Yorkshire, I have been working on Sam’s law and with organisations such as RoSPA, the Royal Life Saving Society, and the fire and rescue services to develop a clear, risk-based approach for water safety, including guidance on when and how lifesaving equipment should be provided. Does the right hon. Member agree that the national accident prevention strategy must bring together those kinds of organisations, which have the experience and knowledge to make sure that these sorts of incidents never happen again?
Sir Andrew Mitchell
As the hon. Member will see as I develop my speech, I very much agree with him.
In Birmingham, we have the seventh highest number of accidental deaths in England. Each year, more than 550 families in our city lose a loved one due to a preventable accident. That is more than one death every day. Across the west midlands, more than 2,000 people annually die due to accidents, the equivalent of wiping out a small village year after year. Nationally, there has been an 8% rise in accidental death rates and a 3% increase in hospital admissions in just one year. Over the past decade, accidental death rates have risen by more than 40%. That is not a blip, a statistical anomaly or a short-term fluctuation; it is a serious problem that has been brushed under the carpet for too long.
There is a wider national cost to this issue. Accidents place a significant and growing burden on the national health service. Every preventable injury that results in an emergency admission adds pressure to already stretched A&E departments, ambulance services and hospital wards. We are talking about millions of bed days every year linked to accident-related admissions. Accidents now are believed to cost us at least £6 billion annually in NHS medical care. The impact on NHS staff is also profound. Doctors, nurses, paramedics and support staff are dealing daily with injuries and emergencies that in many cases could have been prevented. That is not only a clinical challenge, but a human one, placing additional strain on a workforce who are already under great pressure.
The burden extends across the economy. When people are injured, they are often unable to work—sometimes temporarily, sometimes permanently. Families lose income; employers lose skilled workers; productivity falls. The country loses millions of working days each year due to accident-related absence. The combined cost to UK business is now estimated at about £6 billion every year.
Taken together, this represents a hidden but substantial cost to the country—to our health service, economy and public finances. The truth is that we can do better. Indeed, we have done better before. We know what works: safer homes, stronger product standards, effective public awareness campaigns, improved design of public spaces, better data collection, and co-ordinated action across Government and local agencies.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
Twenty-eight-year-old Benedict Solly was killed on the A37, near Cerne Abbas, at a notorious accident hotspot. Local residents had been calling for interventions to make that junction safe, but part of the problem is that the decision on whether to make an intervention at the junction is based on historical data, which is only recording actual collisions—not near misses, accidents avoided or all those other things. Does the right hon. Member agree that we need a wider dataset in order to inform the interventions that we make to avoid fatal accidents occurring?
Sir Andrew Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman makes an extremely good point, and he adds that particular tragedy to the tragedies that I have already mentioned. Of course he is right that, with modern technology racing ahead in so many ways, our data should be better and more effective at informing the decisions that are made. He made that point with great eloquence.
What is currently lacking is a clear, coherent and sustained national strategy to bring these efforts together. At present, responsibility for accident prevention is fragmented across multiple Departments: Health, Transport, Housing, Education and others. The result is a system in which responsibility is dispersed, co-ordination is inconsistent and prevention too often falls through institutional gaps. That is why I believe there is now a compelling case for a national accident prevention strategy. Such a strategy would have benefits across the whole of Government: safer roads for the Department for Transport, reduced pressure on the national health service for the Department of Health and Social Care, less spending on benefits for people unable to work because of accidents for the Department for Work and Pensions and higher productivity for the Treasury. A national accident prevention strategy must therefore be led by the Cabinet Office, which has the oversight necessary to set cross-Government priorities and to co-ordinate and align the activities of different Departments to achieve them.
Becky Hickman and RoSPA should be asked to produce a report for the Government on what such a strategy might look like. It should, in my view, be based on a few clear principles: first, ministerial leadership at the centre of Government, ensuring accountability and direction; secondly, a clear focus on prevention, rather than simply reacting after harm has occurred—the very point that the hon. Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) was making just a moment ago.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
Rural communities face unique challenges when it comes to prevention and addressing accidents. We are more isolated, we have terrible signal, we have roads more likely to lead to crashes and agriculture is Britain’s most dangerous industry. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that any national accident prevention strategies must focus on rurality and be matched by proper investment in public health funding, which areas such as Somerset have always lost out on?
Sir Andrew Mitchell
I think I agree with what the hon. Gentleman says, except that I would not wish to make an exceptional case for the countryside. This issue affects all part of our country. As he will know, the royal town of Sutton Coldfield is an ancient town and is therefore not part of the countryside as such, although within the royal town of Sutton Coldfield we have the biggest municipal park in Europe, so we at least doff our caps to the issue of rurality.
I was listing the number of clear principles that I thought should inform a report of the type I have described. I had mentioned two; the third is indeed the better use of data, so that we understand where risks are emerging, where interventions are needed and whether policies are working. I suspect I will carry the two hon. Gentlemen who have intervened on me on that point: the hon. Members for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme and for West Dorset (Edward Morello). The fourth principle is a serious focus on those most at risk of accidental harm. The fifth and final principle is a sustained approach to public education and awareness, so that safety is embedded across the life course from childhood through to older age.
I want to return briefly to the human reality behind all this: a child walking to school, a friend cooking a meal at home, a parent swimming in the sea on holiday—ordinary stories with tragic endings. As Members of Parliament, we all know of searingly heartbreaking, awful occurrences such as poor Natasha’s death. We have the evidence and the tools, and we have the example of other countries such as Australia and Finland, where co-ordinated Government accident prevention strategies are already in place. What is missing in the UK is the sustained national leadership to bring those together.
We should not accept a situation in which tens of thousands of lives are lost each year to preventable accidents. We should not accept a system that is fragmented when lives depend on co-ordination. We should not accept avoidable suffering when the knowledge, tools and capacity to prevent it already exist. Ultimately, it is not just about policy, but about whether we are prepared to act on what we already know: that far too many lives are being lost unnecessarily, and that that does not have to be the case.
Those are all non-party political points. There is no party politics in this. I appeal to the good sense and experience of all Members of this House in the hope that together we can support the Government to drive that agenda forward with vigour.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for securing this debate. I am pleased to respond on behalf of the Government. I offer my condolences to all those affected by the incidents in his constituency that he mentioned, including Natasha’s family and friends. I pay tribute to him for raising awareness of this important issue.
As the right hon. Gentleman rightly suggests, it is not unreasonable to expect to be able to go about our everyday lives without the fear or risk of accidents. The impact on individuals and their families and friends can be devastating. I share his view that we should collectively act to address those risks.
As the Minister responsible for road safety, I am aware of the right hon. Gentleman’s interest in the lead-up to the publication of the road safety strategy earlier this year. He has a track record of making the case for effective safety measures in his constituency and beyond. That is of course to his great credit.
I am particularly struck by the fact that we are here on International Workers’ Memorial Day. Too many people are killed or injured as a result of their work, and it is apt that we are discussing this issue on a day when we are remembering those killed in workplace incidents. We must recommit to fight for a safer future for the living.
As the right hon. Gentleman noted, accident prevention cuts across several areas and the responsibilities of many Departments. Within my ambit, it means road traffic collision prevention. More widely, accident prevention impacts home safety, safety in the workplace, product safety, building safety, safety in childcare, sickness prevention and much more.
The right hon. Gentleman spoke movingly about the incident that we have all heard about as constituency Members. The Government clearly recognise the importance of prevention, protecting lives, promoting good health and ensuring that public services are not called upon when they do not need to be. Several hon. Members have talked about the impact of accidents on our economy and the national health service. It is the first job of Government to keep the British people safe. I know that colleagues in all Departments are taking measures to ensure our approach to accident prevention is as strong as it can be.
With that in mind, I hope that right hon. and hon. Members will allow me the opportunity to speak first about the work of my own Department. This country has some of the safest roads in the world, but years of complacency have allowed our road safety record to slip. Around four people die on our roads every single day—lives taken too soon, lives altered beyond recognition and lives grieved by families left behind.
Language and terminology matter to victims of road traffic collisions. Since 2022, other than when required by specific legislation, the Department for Transport has used the term “collision” in relation to road traffic crashes, because the term “accident” can imply that events are unavoidable or without fault. We know that the vast majority of incidents on our roads are preventable.
Earlier this year, my Department published the new road safety strategy, because we believe that road traffic collisions are preventable. Our strategy sets out how we intend to deal with the root causes of collisions. We have set out our vision for safer roads for all, including ambitious targets to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured by 65%—70% for children—by 2035. Rooted in innovation and underpinned by the safe system approach, our strategy recognises that although driver error is inevitable, deaths and serious injuries on our roads are not.
The strategy outlines concrete steps to better support road users, including consultations. Five consultations were published alongside the road safety strategy, on minimum learning periods, lower drink-drive limits and mandatory eyesight testing. I make no apology for consulting, because since we are publishing the first road safety strategy in a generation, we must take the time to get it right. It is right that we have set out in those consultations what we intend to do, but also that we listen very carefully to how best to make those changes. I want to see progress—I will be chairing a national road safety board to ensure the implementation of the strategy—and of course I want to see those numbers going down, as we have set ambitious targets for what we want to achieve over the next decade, but I do not think it was wrong to consult on them.
The strategy commits to harnessing technology, data and innovation to improve the safety of vehicles and infrastructure. It sets out a strengthened approach to enforcement, putting penalties under review and considering new powers to suspend licences. The hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) rightly raised the potential of those new technologies, including AI, but he also highlighted the importance of getting that technology right, including automated vehicles. They have a huge potential, as we know that driver error is such an important contributory factor in many road traffic collisions. The ability to remove the potential for driver error with an automated vehicle is there, but we must make sure that the technology is as reliable as a careful and competent driver. That is why we have the piloting of the automated vehicles but with a safety driver in place at the moment.
What applies to road safety as much as any other area of accident prevention is the importance of collective effort. We rely on partnerships with local authorities, industry, emergency services, charities, stakeholders and communities. In transport, we recognise the importance of a just culture, recognising that humans do make mistakes, systems can fail, safety improves when people are honest, and learning means more than blame. In aviation, rail and maritime, we have the accident investigation branches. They are not there to apportion blame or liability. Their focus is investigating serious incidents to ensure that we can learn from them and prevent reoccurrence.
Accident prevention must be a call to action, not just a new policy or a set of regulations. Right hon. and hon. Members will be aware of “THINK!”, the Government’s flagship road safety campaign, which aims to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on the roads in England and Wales. It seeks to change attitudes and behaviours among those at risk, and it is a good example of the importance of public awareness campaigning.
I pay tribute to all those individuals, organisations, campaigners and response teams who make such a difference to lives across the country, both by raising awareness of those most at risk of harm and by standing ready and responding night and day to help people in danger. I am thinking of our lifeboat responders, our mountain rescue teams and many others.
In housing safety—I think the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) mentioned this—the Government are taking various actions to improve safety and accident prevention. The decent homes standard is one of several new and updated measures to improve quality in the private rented sector. That includes Awaab’s law, which requires landlords to address issues of damp and mould within stricter timeframes—not accidents, but ill health caused by living in unsafe conditions. There are also new fines for landlords whose properties contain serious hazards.
Action is being taken on all 58 recommendations from the Grenfell inquiry report, and that is intended to build a more robust and trusted regulatory system in the wake of that tragedy. We will never forget those taken too soon, or the impact that will still be felt every day by their loved ones.
In December, the Government published the single construction regulator prospectus and consultation document, laying out plans for regulatory reform to integrate the regulation of buildings, products and professions. That followed the appointment of an expert panel to help guide the Building Safety Regulator-led review of the building regulations guidance.
My hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) and the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) both mentioned the dangers around rivers, canals, lakes and the sea. It takes a real collective effort by emergency services and volunteers to deliver search and rescue services, and the Government have made tangible progress in recent years to support voluntary organisations. In the recent Budget, a vehicle excise duty exemption was announced for mountain rescue, lowland rescue, cave rescue, independent lifeboats and the Royal National Lifeboat Institution. That reflects a clear recognition of the public value of search and rescue volunteers and the practical costs they bear in carrying out their work. They also do important work making people aware of those dangers as part of that prevention agenda.
I was saddened to read in the annual review of RoSPA, to which I will refer in a moment, that alcohol-related deaths have increased by 5% following a period of relative stability. Those include accidents caused by exposure or poisoning. All such deaths are a tragedy. The Government have committed to help people make healthier choices about alcohol, and we are working towards legal requirements for alcohol labels to display health warnings and consistent nutritional information.
To better support people experiencing harmful drinking and alcohol dependence, we published the first ever UK clinical guidelines on alcohol treatment to drive improvements in treatment provision. Our extensive programme of implementation support for the guidelines has been positively received by commissioners and providers, and we continue to work across Government to consider further measures to reduce the negative impact alcohol has on health inequalities, crime and the economy. The same could be said of some drug use, which is also a major cause of accidents and poisonings.
When it comes to health, it is worth speaking about falls. Falls accounted for almost half of all fatal accidents in the UK in 2023, and 59% of all accident-related hospital admissions in 2023-24, making them by far the largest single category of accidental harm. That is against a long-term backdrop of falls fatalities increasing by 81% between 2013 and 2022.
There is hope, however, and again it comes to technology. Emerging evidence from Government-funded independent evaluations indicates that falls technologies can reduce falls in care homes by between 37% and 49%, as well as reducing hospital admissions and freeing up staff time. In the next year, the Government will set new national standards for care technologies and produce trusted guidance so that people can confidently buy and use technology that supports them or the people they care for. The hon. Member for Richmond Park asked some important questions about social care, and I will ensure that she receives a written response to those questions.
Let me move on to workplace safety. The Government’s Employment Rights Act 2025 is an important step towards delivering the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation. Ensuring statutory sick pay from day one will reduce the risk of presenteeism, a key risk in operational environments when people are at work but unwell. Limits on non-disclosure agreements will enable learning from incidents instead of silencing them. Reducing zero-hours working will ensure greater predictability in work patterns, reducing fatigue, working alone or rushed work. The creation of the Fair Work Agency will provide better protection for whistleblowers, reinforcing a strong safety culture in our workplaces.
Making it easier for trade unions to organise ensures that more workplaces benefit from health and safety representatives and the vital work that they do. I pay tribute to trade unionists across the country who are health and safety representatives. I know at first hand the incredible work they do to keep workplaces safe.
Lee Pitcher
As the Minister mentioned, it is International Workers’ Memorial Day, and trade unions have been here today to make sure we raise awareness of it. This year’s theme is the psychosocial interventions required to support workers and mental health. Will she take the opportunity to remember those we have lost at work, to promote to employers the implementation of strong mental health interventions at work and to raise awareness to prevent lives being lost?
Lilian Greenwood
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We think of all those who have lost their life at work; I think that about 120 people each year are killed in the course of their work. There is also a much more widespread problem of people suffering ill health, particularly relating to work-related stress and mental health. The best employers work really hard on those issues, often in consultation with their trade union health and safety reps.
The Health and Safety Executive is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. It delivers a combination of proportionate enforcement, targeted regulatory work engagement and the development of standards and guidance. That includes public awareness activity to promote the safe use of ladders and power tools through guidance, surveillance work and campaigns.
The hon. Member for Strangford, who is no longer in his place, rightly spoke about the risks in agriculture. HSE works extensively with the Farm Safety Partnership to ensure that industry is aware of risks. We think about similar things in relation to construction and other high-risk environments.
Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)
With a huge sense of trepidation, as he was not here for the openings—or at least not until the very end of them.
Joe Morris
I apologise for my tardiness, Dr Murrison. I just want to pick up on the point about agriculture. As we are talking about national accident prevention, it is important to recognise that accidents in rural areas require a different level of promotion and public engagement. Will the Minister therefore join me in urging everyone involved in accident prevention to recognise the unique challenges that rural areas face and to take appropriate steps where possible, whether that is in road safety or in workplace safety?
Lilian Greenwood
My hon. Friend makes an important point. In addressing all these things, we must think about who is most at risk and what the appropriate way is to intervene. A point was made earlier about how rural areas are particularly at risk. We know that those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds—the people in the poorest neighbourhoods—are most at risk of being involved in serious incidents. That is true for road safety, as it is for other things, but my hon. Friend is right to raise the issue of rurality, because rural roads are among the most dangerous.
To address accidents in educational settings, the Department for Education has worked with the Food Standards Agency to develop a food safety advice webpage, including a section on choking prevention. The Department already works with the Department for Business and Trade to ensure that safety alerts for products related to early years and childcare, including the five-step safety message for parents and carers, are communicated to the sector to minimise the risk of serious injury from toys.
Finally, the Office for Product Safety and Standards, which sits within the Department for Business and Trade, and local authority trading standards has powers to tackle the supply of unsafe or non-compliant consumer products and remove them from the market. The Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025 introduced various measures to reduce the risk of fires, including the risk of e-bike and e-scooter battery fires. Secondary legislation will regulate battery design, compatibility and safety information for consumers. The office also works with a variety of stakeholders, including fire and rescue services, other regulators, consumer bodies and safety charities, to gather information about incidents that may be linked to product safety issues.
I pay tribute to all the charities in the sector, which do such vital work, and to the volunteers, without whom they would not function. I know that many campaigners across the country do valuable work to raise awareness of accident prevention and shine a light on areas where improvement is needed. Like the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield, I note the work of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents to campaign for a reduction in accidents at home, on the road, at work and at leisure. I particularly note its recently published annual review, which followed its 2024 report calling for a national accident prevention strategy. It has powerfully highlighted the human and economic costs of accidents to individuals and to society.
We recognise that coherent action is an important factor in tackling issues that may have many dimensions and owners. I regret that I am not in a position today to commit the Government to a national strategy, but I hope that right hon. and hon. Members can be reassured of two things. First, individual Departments take seriously their responsibilities for safety, security and accident prevention; I hope that the House will recognise my passion for road safety as just one example. Secondly, we will continue to work across Government to ensure that our approach to accident prevention is the right one. That includes a focus on prevention, such as rolling out a range of measures to tackle health inequalities and stop health problems at source. It also includes better use of data, such as the establishment of a data-led road safety investigation branch covering the whole of Great Britain, which will draw on data to carry out thematic investigations and make recommendations.
Once again, I thank the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield for securing this debate. I am grateful to you, for overseeing us this afternoon, Dr Murrison, and I thank all right hon. and hon. Members who have spoken.
Sir Andrew Mitchell
I thank the Minister and the shadow Minister for their speeches, which I think have very fully answered the comments that I tried to make in opening the debate. I also thank colleagues across the House for their contribution to this important subject.
I was pleased to hear the Minister say that she will chair the national road safety board. I very much hope that she will use that opportunity to help drive the more comprehensive approach to this matter that I set out in my opening remarks. In particular, I hope that she will ensure that it does not suffer from departmental turf exchanges. There is a real win to be achieved here by helping to drive this through the whole of Whitehall and produce a genuinely comprehensive strategy. I also hope that she will use RoSPA, which she spoke about warmly. I strongly concur with her remarks: it is a great organisation that can give the necessary perspective that we require, quite apart from being an example of the good sense and wisdom of the royal town of Sutton Coldfield, where it is based.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the potential merits of a national accident prevention strategy.