Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings in a Relevant Place) (England) Regulations 2020

Lord Campbell-Savours Excerpts

Friday 18th September 2020 Lords Chamber

[Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab) [V]]

[Inaudible.]—but on four separate occasions, on 8, 24 and 29 July, and again on 14 September, I raised the issue of valves on masks. I have argued consistently throughout that the only people who should wear valve masks are medics working in a clinical setting. Therefore, for the fifth time of asking, as they say, will Ministers rule out N95s and other valve masks, apart from in clinical settings? They serve to protect only the wearer and not potential aerosol-contaminated recipients. Valves leak. Valve masks are designed to make it easier to breathe out because their one-way valves release exhaled air without forcing it through a filter. There are now far too many valve masks in circulation, giving the public an exaggerated sense of safety.

I appeal to the Government to please address this issue. A flood of well-documented material is available for officials to consider. The research review document Face Masks Against COVID-19: An Evidence Review deals with transmissibility in both pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic cases, and, in particular, with the filtering characteristics of masks. Officials should read it.

However, of particular interest is the position in San Francisco, where a public health emergency order has been issued, stating:

“Violation of or failure to comply with this Order is a misdemeanor punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both.”


The order defines non-compliant masks and states:

“Any mask that incorporates a one-way valve … that is designed to facilitate easy exhaling allows droplets to be released from the mask, putting others nearby at risk … must not be used to comply with this Order”.


How do Ministers respond to that?

On associated matters, I also ask that Ministers review my Question to the noble Baroness, Lady Vere, of 9 September, reported at col. 785 of Hansard, on legal liability and that I be given a full, considered response. I also ask that the Minister respond to my question on the use of positive-pressure masking systems, which I raised on 24 July with the noble Lord, Lord Bethell. My noble friend Lord Rooker raised the issue of three-layer fabric masks—the subject of a question from my noble friend Lady Andrews. I hope that Ministers can reply comprehensively to that particularly important question.