Member

On Amendment 192A in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Kamall, which was spoken to by the noble Earl, Lord Howe, the Bill recasts an existing regulation- making power in the Health Act 2006, as the noble Earl said. Currently, the exemption for performers to smoke in a smoke-free place relates to the premises—for example, a theatre or a film set. In recasting this power, the Government wish to make it clear that the new defence relates to a person only rather than the premises. If this defence is relied on in court—I emphasise this because I hope it will be helpful—the defendant would need to produce only minimal evidence about whether smoking was justified for the artistic integrity of the performance. The burden is then on the prosecution to disprove the defence. Therefore, this would not amount to an additional burden on performers. It might be helpful if I say to the noble Earl that it is anticipated that this will make no practical difference for production companies or performers. We would be very happy to work with organisations, such as trade bodies or membership organisations, to clarify this position.