HC Deb 07 July 1926 vol 197 cc2067-70
41. Mr. T. WILLIAMS

asked the Prime Minister if he will now state clearly and in detail the exact proposals of the Government for implementing the Coal Commission's recommendation; the date when these proposals were submitted to the Coal Owners' Association and the Miners' Federation; which of the proposals were accepted or rejected by both parties; and, further, will he give the date when he last invited the owners and workers' representatives to meet in joint conference to discuss these or other proposals for a settlement of the mining disputes?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland)

I have been asked to reply. To recapitulate all the information asked for by the hon. Member would take me far outside the bounds of an answer to a Parliamentary question. Most of the points raised by the hon. Member have already been the subject of Debate in the House on more than one occasion.

Mr. WILLIAMS

Is it not the case that the coalowners rejected the Prime Minister's proposals on the 21st May, and that the Miners' Federation of Great Britain also rejected those terms because of the implied immediate reduction in wages and lack of essential details; and does not the right hon. Gentleman think that, after six weeks have elapsed, it is the duty of the Government to convene a further meeting of the two parties at which the present detailed proposals can be laid before them and discussed?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

If I may say so, the argumentative form of the hon. Member's supplementary question really shows that this is a matter which cannot be dealt with in detail by question and answer.

Mr. WILLIAMS

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to answer the last part of the question, namely, when last did the Prime Minister invite the two parties to meet together to discuss the reorganisation proposals of the Government?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

Not for some considerable time, and the reason is that it is no good asking the two parties to meet together to discuss reorganisation or any other proposals until it is propitious and some good can be obtained by the joint meeting of the two parties.

Mr. PALING

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what was the last date on which the Government met the owners with regard to the wage claims that had to be set down and in response to which they were going to get the eight hours; and will he state whether the Miners' Federation were given an invitation to discuss the same question?

Mr. SPENCER

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Lord Londonderry in another place last night stated with emphasis that the owners had accepted the Report, and can he say whether there is any truth in that as far as the Government are concerned?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

I cannot continue to answer these questions without notice as regards statements made in another place which I have not seen and which really do not arise from the question on the Paper.

Mr. PALING

Are not these matters, on which information is being asked, matters with which the Government have already dealt, and are not we on this side entitled to answers to the questions we are asking?

Mr. WILLIAMS

In view of the tremendous national importance of the statements that have been made with regard to reorganisation acceptance or rejection, will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House, and the country through the House, definitely whether the coalowners have really accepted the reorganisation proposals of the Government or not?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

The answer of the owners was quite definitely given at an early stage of the proceedings, as the hon. Member knows as well as I do, and that is exactly why I referred to the fact that the information which is at the disposal of the Government has also been at the disposal of the hon. Member himself. Nothing further with regard to that particular point has transpired that I am aware of, speaking on the spur of the moment in reply to a supplementary question.

Mr. SPENCER

May I ask whether the owners accepted categorically the recommendations of the Commissioners? Did they or did they not?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

All I can answer to the hon. Member is that the exact degree of acceptance of the private owners, whether he would describe it as categorical or not, of the recommendations of the Royal Commission, was pub- lished in the "Times" two months ago at least, and it is as open to the hon. Member as it is to anyone else to place his exact interpretation upon that. I have no other information as to the degree of acceptance which I can give.

Mr. SPENCER

I am asking simply what the Government's interpretation was. The right hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that in five respects they have said they agreed, and the others were modifications. Do I understand that the Government believe that they did accept under conditions of that character?

Mr. SPEAKER

I do not see how the Minister can answer that question. It involves other parties.

Mr. WILLIAMS

With great respect, may I ask if the Minister will be good enough to state whether the coalowners have expressed their willingness to accept the reorganisation proposals with which the Government are now dealing?

Mr. SPEAKER

I think that that question should be put down.