HC Deb 17 February 1986 vol 92 cc10-2
9. Mr. Dormand

asked the Secretary of Stale for Energy when he next proposes to meet the chairman of the National Coal Board to discuss the working of the modified colliery review procedure.

Mr. Peter Walker

I last met the chairman on 12 February when, among other matters, we discussed the operation of the modified colliery review procedure.

Mr. Dormand

Does the Secretary of State recall that last week I raised with him the serious inconsistency in the reviews on Horden and Bates'? Will he confirm that he has the authority to instruct, or to offer strong guidelines to the review body that social and economic effects must be taken into consideration when decisions are taken? If not, does that not make a farce of the review system and, perhaps more important, lead to a substantial loss of confidence in that procedure on the part of the NUM?

Mr. Walker

I can only say that one of the problems of starting a genuine review body is that if several individuals are judging individual cases, they will not all come forward with a universal viewpoint. That is bound to happen. I can understand the concern and aggravation that there is not a uniform viewpoint. If there is a uniform viewpoint in one direction some might be pleased, but if it is in another direction, others might be displeased. The review body is at the commencement of its proceedings, and that is what has happened so far.

Mr. Ryman

Is the Secretary of State aware—I am sure he is—that on 4 February Mr. Peter Bowsher, QC, made a strong recommendation that the Bates' colliery should remain open for two years? Is he further aware that the NCB has so far refused to accept that recommendation after a three-day hearing, when the evidence was carefully analysed? Will he use his influence to persuade the NCB to take a decision immediately, upholding the recommendation of Mr. Bowsher?

Mr. Walker

No, Sir, I shall certainly not use any such influence. I do not set myself up as the arbiter of which of the review body's proposals are accepted and which are rejected. That is not my task, nor is it the task of any of Her Majesty's Ministers. No one who has read the Bates' report would say that it was a lovely, clear report enthusiastically suggesting something in one direction. It was perfectly correct for the National Coal Board to announce that it will carefully study the details of the report before taking a decision.

Mr. Orme

In support of my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth Valley (Mr. Ryman) and his point about Bates' colliery and the review body, may I ask the Secretary of State whether he has discussed the matter with the chairman of the National Coal Board, and whether he has a personal opinion on the matter?

Mr. Walker

No, Sir. I have made it clear that it is for the board to decide and come to its conclusions on the matter. I was informed by the NCB chairman that when this substantial report was issued, about a day before a meeting of the board, it decided—sensibly—to examine the report thoroughly before putting it to the board for decision.

Mr. Holt

Does my right hon. Friend accept that on Friday last, as a result of a long-standing engagement, I visited the regional director of the NCB in the north-east of England and discussed, among other things, pit closures? He expressed the view most strongly that it was disappointing that only three Members from the north-east had bothered to see him, two of whom were Conservative Members.

Mr. Walker

I cannot comment on the detailed discussion that took place. I can only say that an increasing number of coal mining constituencies now have the privilege of being represented by Tory Members of Parliament.

Mr. Boyes

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

I will take it after Question Time.