Carbon Monoxide Poisoning: Travel Advice

Mark Francois Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Pinkerton]

As I was saying, one of the greatest challenges that Cathy and campaign groups face in their advocacy for carbon monoxide awareness is the lack of accurate data on carbon monoxide-related deaths overseas. We know that fatalities have occurred over the past 25 years in the likes of Spain, Egypt, France and Ecuador, with many more cases of travellers being hospitalised worldwide. The data remains fragmented, however, and it drastically under-records and under-represents the true scale of carbon monoxide deaths.

In many countries, post-mortem toxicology reports are not required, meaning that carbon monoxide often goes undetected and unrecorded. Ultimately, deaths caused by carbon monoxide may be attributed to generic pulmonary conditions, as happened with Hudson. The silent killer remains silent. The UK charity CO-Gas Safety has recorded 34 deaths of British citizens overseas by carbon monoxide poisoning since 1999, but it stresses that that is a vast under-recording. How many more have gone undocumented?

Many families lack the resources or ability to do what Cathy did, leaving them without the truth that they deserve. It is crucial to understand that the dangers of carbon monoxide extend far beyond sudden fatal poisoning. Since taking up this cause, I have met survivors who suffer from the long-term health implications, including severe cognitive impairments that affect memory, language, mood and behaviour, all of which are caused by prolonged CO exposure.

The risk is not limited to home stays such as the one Hudson was in when he died, nor is it confined to low-budget backpacker accommodation, as some might assume. In May 2022, three American tourists were found dead in their villas at the Sandals resort in the Bahamas, having all perished from the effects of carbon monoxide. Let me be clear: this can happen to anyone anywhere, at any age, in a luxury hotel or a backpacker hostel. Faults can develop even in well-maintained appliances, meaning that all travellers, regardless of where they stay, would be well advised to take precautions. The most heart-wrenching reality of this particular tragedy is that it was entirely preventable. If only Hudson had been aware of the high levels of carbon monoxide in his home stay—if only he had carried a £20 portable carbon monoxide alarm.

Since Hudson’s death, Cathy and her family, who are here today, have dedicated themselves to raising awareness of the risks of CO poisoning through Hudson’s Pack Safe appeal—a campaign that encourages travellers, particularly young backpackers, to carry and use a carbon monoxide alarm. Working in collaboration with the Safer Tourism Foundation, Cathy’s campaign pushes for greater responsibility across the travel industry to ensure that all accommodation providers, from chain hotels to Airbnb hosts, pay attention to carbon monoxide safety. Hudson’s Pack Safe appeal has already made significant progress in educating about these potential dangers.

Through the sheer force of her character—I can attest to that force—Cathy has taken Hudson’s message on to radio and television, and even into the match day programme at Chelsea football club, the team Hudson had supported all his life. It is fair to say that this debate would not be happening today had it not been for the constituency surgery I had with Cathy last November. That conversation opened my eyes to the devastating effect that carbon monoxide poisoning can have. Although I had heard of the odourless, colourless gas before and was aware of the “silent killer” label, I had no understanding of CO’s deadly consequences, not just for travellers such as Hudson but for people in homes here in the UK.

That brings me to what I ask the Government to do on behalf of Hudson’s family and all the campaign groups I have been working with, many of whom are in the Gallery. The root cause of these preventable deaths is the fact that travellers are simply unaware that the accommodation they are staying in could pose a potential carbon monoxide risk. They do not even realise that the danger exists. Although the risk of carbon monoxide is undoubtedly everywhere, even here in the UK, education about its risk is not at the same level as, say, education about the risk of fire. Unlike fire, people cannot see it, smell it or sense it. They would not even know if they were suffering from its effects. That is the fundamental issue.

Shockingly, many major travel companies, such as the one that Hudson used to organise his kit list for his trip to South America, are completely unaware of those risks. But there is a devastatingly simple way to put the risks of carbon monoxide poisoning on to the radar of the UK travel industry, and into the minds and plans of British people travelling overseas. The UK travel sector closely monitors and indexes itself against the travel advice provided by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. From school trips abroad to travel companies, the travel industry uses information from the gov.uk website and feeds it into corporate and institutional risk assessments and travel guides. I know, because I have done it myself when organising field trips and coursework overseas in the university sector.

The FCDO has a huge amount of influence in the UK travel sector, even if it does not always realise it, and the risks faced by travellers are clearly reflected in the travel advice and kit lists that the FCDO provides. In correspondence with me on 22 January, the Minister of State for Development stated that the British embassy in Quito had recently reviewed carbon monoxide poisoning incidents in Ecuador, and as a result had determined not to update travel advice to add the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. Given Cathy’s experience in securing an accurate post-mortem assessment in Hudson’s case, the reliability of the data on which that assessment was made is certainly open to question.

Some may ask: why focus this debate on risk to travellers overseas? The answer is simple. Because carbon monoxide has no smell or taste, it is not an obvious danger, so it can happen anywhere in the world. Someone such as Hudson, who only felt faint in the days leading up to his death, would not necessarily have realised that he was in any imminent danger. People instinctively flee when they see fire, but the same instinctive response does not apply to carbon monoxide poisoning.

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this debate, which, as he said, is very important to Cathy and her family, some of whom have graced us with their presence this afternoon. Although this was a tragic loss of a young man in his prime, does the hon. Member agree that if other lives are saved because better precautions are taken, some good might yet come for others from the family’s tragic bereavement?

[Dr Pinkerton]

I completely agree. Even though I do not speak for Cathy, I know that she would agree with that. The change that is required is devastatingly simple. It is a minor change that we are looking for. Just a few lines added to the Government travel advice could have a lifesaving impact of the kind that the right hon. Gentleman mentions. The FCDO has a real opportunity to influence the entire travel sector by identifying the risk of carbon monoxide on its travel advisory pages, from where it can cascade through the wider UK travel industry. I must confess I am not convinced that the FCDO fully appreciates or grasps the power and influence it has over that sector, or the close attention that individuals and institutions pay to its travel advisory pages.

Of course, advice can go only so far. If travellers are warned of the risks of carbon monoxide, it becomes their individual responsibility to pack a portable carbon monoxide alarm and use it while travelling. That link is often broken. We hope that today the FCDO can see a way to use its power to reduce risk and possibly prevent further tragic losses of British lives overseas. Hudson Foley’s death was not an isolated incident, but Cathy’s extraordinary determination has ensured that his story has been heard today. I urge the Government to move beyond the mindset that more numerical evidence is needed before action is taken. I contend that we cannot afford to wait for more deaths before reacting; we must act now.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for securing the debate. I send my condolences to Cathy and to the whole family for the tragic loss of Hudson in Ecuador. I know how difficult it must be, and my thoughts are with them. I am grateful, too, for the contributions of other hon. Members, and I shall try to respond to the points that have been made. I know that some of those contributions are informed by personal and painful experience.

I am the Minister with consular responsibilities for British nationals overseas, so I hope hon. Members will forgive me if my speech focuses on the overseas elements of the debate. We have taken careful note of the points made for other Departments, including the Northern Ireland Office, the Department of Health and Social Care and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. My officials will seek answers for hon. Members on the more detailed questions that I am unable to answer today.

Supporting British nationals abroad is clearly a key priority for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Most British people live or travel abroad without incident or needing to seek consular assistance. When an incident does occur, they naturally and understandably ask whether it was preventable. If it was not, what might have made it more bearable?

Let me say a few words on how the Government are acting to help British nationals in need abroad. I will begin by setting out our approach to travel advice, the goal of which is to help British nationals to make better informed decisions about international travel. Their safety is always our top priority, and our advice is based on objective assessments of the risks, based on inputs from multiple sources. That includes our own embassies, foreign Governments, and, where relevant, intelligence services.

On carbon monoxide poisoning specifically, as the House will be aware, building, fire and gas safety standards abroad do not always match those in the UK, as the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) identified. Since the Foreign Office lacks in-house expertise on building safety, we share information from expert organisations, such as Energy UK, in some of our travel advice. As the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said, for some countries, such as China and Nepal, where carbon monoxide poisoning is a higher risk, we include specific information on that in our travel advice, based on local reports and consular case trends.

I recognise the questions asked by the hon. Member for Romford about trends; it is difficult to determine those on the basis of the information available to the Foreign Office. Last year, sadly, 4,000 British nationals lost their lives overseas, and we believe that at least two of those were as a consequence of carbon monoxide poisoning. However, as many hon. Members have identified, we cannot be sure of what we do not know. Wherever cases are raised, as with the tragic case raised by the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, my officials and I are available. If there is uncertainty about the cause of death and further support is required from the Foreign Office, we stand available to provide that. But as I think the hon. Member identified, ultimately, our advice is there to guide people, not to set rules that people must abide by. It is intended as just one source of information to help British people to make informed decisions about where and how they travel.

I acknowledge what the hon. Member for Surrey Heath said about the impact of our advice. I assure the House that we always consider the arguments for changes to travel advice on their merits. We must make judgments, try to consider all risks proportionately, and consider the best way to ensure that advice is presented to travellers.

[Mr Francois]

On the point about the extent of guidance, with my recent gas bill, I got a leaflet from British Gas—which I take to be authoritative—warning about the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning. It estimated that about 50 people had died from it in the UK in the previous year. That is slightly higher than but similar to the APPG’s estimate. British Gas is warning people here in the UK. Given what has happened, it would not be a great deal of skin off the Minister’s nose if we were able to say that the Government will make including that a standard part of travel advice for Brits going abroad. Can I invite him, with the family here, to do the right thing?

[Mr Falconer]

I think the right hon. Gentleman’s proposal is that we include the risks from carbon monoxide everywhere in the world. I am happy to take away that proposal and to come back with a more detailed answer, particularly in relation to the letter from the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, in which he set out some further requests of the Foreign Office, as he did in his speech. With travel advice, we always balance the desire not to have too much standard text across all countries with the wish to keep it as focused as possible, but I am happy to take away that question and return to it.

Alongside travel advice, of course, the Government aim to reduce incidents through our long-standing Travel Aware campaign, which includes key messages such as encouraging British nationals to have appropriate travel insurance, to read our travel advice and to sign up for our alerts. We partner with more than 100 organisations from across the travel industry, including airlines, tour operators and insurance providers, and we ask them to help to amplify our key messages and drive customers to our travel advice pages.

We try to regularly review our work with partners to ensure that they highlight appropriate issues to British travellers. That has included work with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Safer Tourism Foundation, which I think the hon. Member for Surrey Heath has mentioned already, to raise awareness specifically on the risks of carbon monoxide poisoning around the world. I commit that my officials will hold another meeting with the Safer Tourism Foundation later this month to explore opportunities for greater collaboration.

Turning now to our work on prevention, we use a range of sources—customer feedback, casework data and in-house research—to determine when to take preventive action. We also work closely with host authorities, partners in the travel industry and others to improve local support for British people abroad. Through our student brand ambassador programme, we aim to raise awareness among young people of preventable incidents.

Let me assure the House that the Government are committed to continual improvement. We are looking for ways to improve our consular services, including our prevention activity, messaging and travel advice. Priority themes are constantly under review, with decisions being made according to what poses the greatest risk to British travellers abroad. We will also explore options for linking to other expert sources through our travel advice pages for solo and independent travellers. That includes advice such as that shared by the Safer Tourism Foundation on carbon monoxide safety.

I admire the efforts of the Foley family to urge travellers to take safety equipment such as carbon monoxide detectors on their travels. We will consider including that in our advice, and it is of course important that travellers use them in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and that they should be maintained and tested regularly.

I emphasise that we welcome all feedback and use it to improve our services. I recognise the strength of feeling from the House and from the hon. Member for Surrey Heath. We will consider his proposals carefully, and I am happy to meet with colleagues again to follow up on these important issues. In the spirit of the speech from the hon. Member for Romford, we intend to work on this on a cross-party basis. I reiterate the Foreign Office’s commitment to providing clear, accessible and up-to-date travel advice. We will keep it under constant review and ensure it reflects the latest assessments. We will continue to collaborate with the travel industry to amplify personal safety messages, and we will work with host Governments to reduce the risks for British people abroad.