§ Amendment made: In page 12, line 8, leave out the words "to endeavour."—[Mr. Bennett.]
§ Mr. SPENCERI beg to move, in page 12, line 11, at the end, to insert the words
and that the colliery owners shall maintain and repair the baths and buildings when erected.1997 I think I am justified in moving an Amendment of this character, in view of the recommendations of the Commission. In dealing with this question they said:Pit-head baths are clearly a part of the necessary equipment of the collieries and the obligation should properly rest in this country, as it rests in others, upon the colliery proprietors. In the present economic condition of the industry, however, we consider that the Welfare Fund should bear the cost.The Bill is making provision for the cost coming out of the welfare fund, but as far as I can see, the maintenance and repairs will be partly a charge on the workmen. In view of the fact that the coalowners are being relieved of the burden of capital expenditure, I think the maintenance charges and charges for repairs to the buildings should be borne by the coalowners themselves. I should like to call attention to what the Commission said with regard to the practice in other countries. Speaking of Germany they say:In all cases the cost of providing and maintaining the installations is borne entirely by the owners.They give other instances where they are borne by the owners. Then with regard to our own Colonies, referring to New Zealand they say:In New Zealand the provision of bathing accommodation is compulsory in mines employing more than 50 men if 30 per cent. request it, the entire cost being a charge on the industry.In both these instances, and in many others, the cost is entirely borne by the industry itself, and not merely the cost of maintenance, and in view of those facts, in conjunction with the fact that the 1911 Act contemplated coalowners bearing a considerable burden with regard to the initial outlay for the installation of these baths, I think now they are going to be relieved by this fund of finding the capital expenditure they certainly ought to undertake to maintain and repair the baths when they are installed.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESI beg to second the Amendment.
It is a very useful one, and I hope the Government will accept it. It is the practice in Germany and New Zealand, and also in this country in other industries, and if the owners in those cases can make this provision, I do not see why it should not be done in the coal industry. 1998 In the first place the owners will be relieved very largely of the capital charge, which is in the right direction, and after all, the running costs of a colliery in maintaining the buildings and keeping them in repair and working condition cannot be very heavy. They will be on their own property and they will have the advantage that the power, lighting and heating and the supply of water will be an infinitesimal charge upon them because it will work in very easily with the rest of their charges.
§ Colonel LANE FOXThe hon. Member who has just spoken suggested that this would be an infinitesimal charge. According to the experience we have of the pit-head baths that now exist under the welfare scheme, the figure comes out at about 1s. a week It depends on the conditions and the circumstances.
§ Sir BEDDOE REESA shilling a week per man or per bath?
§ Colonel LANE FOXPer man per week.
§ Mr. TINKERWhat is the authority for that figure?
§ Colonel LANE FOXIt is the experience we have at present of schemes now existing under the welfare scheme. I can get complete figures justifying it. It is a perfectly genuine figure.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESDoes that shilling cover also the repayment of the capital outlay, or is it purely for the cost of maintenance and repair week by week? If it is, we cannot accept it so readily as that. I think it is an exorbitant charge.
§ Colonel LANE FOXCertainly it does not cover that.
§ Mr. STEPHENWill the right hon. Gentleman give us the items that make up the shilling?
§ Colonel LANE FOXI have not got them with me now, but I will try to get them. I have verified them. If this Amendment is accepted it will upset the working of a great many schemes. The general arrangement has been that the arrangements are made according to the circumstances of each colliery. In some cases the costs will be higher than in others. In some cases there will be an opportunity of making contributions— 1999 steam, water, coal, or whatever it may be. As this is taken as part of the welfare scheme, it would be a very great pity to upset the existing arrangement. Arrangements can undoubtedly be made quite satisfactorily for the maintenance of the baths, and if this additional charge is put on, of course it will be to that extent a discouragement to apply for baths. There is no doubt that where a
§ certain contribution is paid by the men, it does give them an interest, and does assist them in seeing that the places are well maintained. Therefore, I do hope the House will not upset the existing arrangement.
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 122; Noes, 272.
2001| Division NO. 405.] | AYES. | [7.32 p.m. |
| Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West) | Hardie, George D. | Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston) |
| Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro') | Hayday, Arthur | Shepherd, Arthur Lewis |
| Ammon, Charles George | Hayes, John Henry | Shiels, Dr. Drummond |
| Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Blisten) | Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley) | Short, Alfred (Wednesbury) |
| Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery) | Hirst, G. H. | Sitch, Charles H. |
| Barr, J. | Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) | Smillie, Robert |
| Batey, Joseph | Hore-Belisha, Leslie | Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley) |
| Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith) | Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield) | Smith, Rennie (Penistone) |
| Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. | Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) | Snell, Harry |
| Briant, Frank | John, William (Rhondda, West) | Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe) |
| Bromfield, William | Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) | Stamford, T. W. |
| Bromley, J. | Jones, T, I. Mardy (Pontypridd) | Stephen, Campbell |
| Brown, James (Ayr and Bute) | Kelly, W. T. | Sullivan, Joseph |
| Cape, Thomas | Kennedy, T. | Sutton, J. E. |
| Charleton, H. C. | Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M. | Taylor, R. A. |
| Clowes, S. | Kenyon, Barnet | Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby) |
| Compton, Joseph | Lawrence, Susan | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.) |
| Connolly, M. | Lee, F. | Thurtle, Ernest |
| Cove, W. G. | Livingstone, A. M. | Tinker, John Joseph |
| Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities) | Lowth, T. | Townend, A. E. |
| Crawfurd, H. E. | Lunn, William | Varley, Frank B. |
| Dalton, Hugh | Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon) | Viant, S. P. |
| Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) | Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan) | Wallhead, Richard C. |
| Day, Colonel Harry | March, S. | Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen |
| Dennison, R. | Montague, Frederick | Watson, W. M (Dunfermline) |
| Duncan, C. | Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) | Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda, |
| Dunnico, H. | Naylor, T. E. | Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney |
| Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. | Oliver, George Harold | Welsh, J. C. |
| Gardner, J. P. | Palin, John Henry | Westwood, J. |
| Gibbins, Joseph | Paling, W. | Whiteley, W. |
| Gillett, George M. | Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) | Wilkinson, Ellen C.. |
| Gosling, Harry | Pethick-Lawrence, F. W. | Williams, David (Swansea, E.) |
| Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) | Ponsonby, Arthur | Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly) |
| Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cont.) | Potts, John S. | Williams, T. (York, Don Valley) |
| Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) | Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring) | Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow) |
| Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) | Riley, Ben | Windsor, Walter |
| Groves, T. | Ritson, J. | Wright, W. |
| Grundy, T. W. | Saklatvala, Shapurji | Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton) |
| Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth) | Salter, Dr. Alfred | |
| Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.) | Scrymgeour, E. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— |
| Hall, F. (York., W.R., Normanton) | Scurr, John | Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. R. |
| Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Sexton, James | Smith |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel | Betterton, Henry B. | Butler, Sir Geoffrey |
| Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T. | Birchall, Major J. Dearman | Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward |
| Alexander, E. E. (Leyton) | Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.) | Calne, Gordon Hall |
| Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby) | Blades, Sir George Rowland | Campbell, E. T. |
| Applin, Colonel R. V. K. | Bourne, Captain Robert Croft | Cassels, J. D. |
| Apsley, Lord | Bowyer, Captain G. E. W. | Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.) |
| Ashley. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W. | Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B. | Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton |
| Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W. | Braithwaite, A. N. | Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J.A.(Birm., W.) |
| Atholl, Duchess of | Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive | Chapman, Sir S. |
| Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley | Briggs, J. Harold | Charteris, Brigadier-General J. |
| Balfour, George (Hampstead) | Briscoe, Richard George | Chilcott, Sir Warden |
| Balniel, Lord | Brittain, Sir Harry | Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer |
| Barclay-Harvey, C. M. | Brocklebank, C. E. R. | Clarry, Reginald George |
| Barnett, Major Sir Richard | Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I. | Clayton, G. C. |
| Barnston, Major Sir Harry | Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham) | Cobb, Sir Cyril |
| Beamish, Captain T. P. H. | Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) | Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. |
| Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.) | Buckingham, Sir H. | Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K. |
| Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W. | Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James | Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips |
| Bennett, A. J. | Burman, J. B. | Couper, J. B. |
| Bethel, A. | Burton, Colonel H. W. | Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L. |
| Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H. | Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. | Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford) |
| Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend) | Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S. | Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A. |
| Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick) | Jacob, A. E. | Rye, F. G. |
| Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro) | James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert | Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham) |
| Cunliffe, Sir Herbert | Jephcott, A. R. | Sandeman, A. Stewart |
| Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry | Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) | Sanders, Sir Robert A. |
| Curzon, Captain Viscount | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Sanderson, Sir Frank |
| Dalkeith, Earl of | Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William | Sandon, Lord |
| Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd) | Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) | Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D. |
| Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H. | Kidd, J. (Linlithgow) | Savery, S. S. |
| Davies, Dr. Vernon | Kindersley, Major G. M. | Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y) |
| Davies, David (Montgomery) | King, Captain Henry Douglas | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley |
| Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Shepperson, E. W. |
| Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester) | Knox, Sir Alfred | Simms, Dr. John M. (Co Down) |
| Dean, Arthur Wellesley | Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R. | Skelton, A. N. |
| Drewe, C. | Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip | Slaney, Major P. Kenyan |
| Eden, Captain Anthony | Little, Dr. E. Graham | Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.) |
| Edmondson, Major A. J. | Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley) | Smith-Carington, Neville W. |
| Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) | Loder, J. de V. | Smithers, Waldron |
| England, Colonel A. | Lord, Walter Greaves- | Somerville, A. A. (Windsor) |
| Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.) | Lougher, L. | Sprot, Sir Alexander |
| Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South) | Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere | Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden,E.) |
| Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.) | Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman | Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland) |
| Everard, W. Lindsay | Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness) | Steel, Major Samuel Strang |
| Fairfax, Captain J. G. | McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus | Storry-Deans, R. |
| Falle, Sir Bertram G. | Macintyre, Ian | Stott, Lieut,-Colonel W. H. |
| Fielden, E. B. | Macmillan, Captain H. | Streatfeild, Captain S. R. |
| Ford, Sir P. J. | McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John | Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C. |
| Forestier-Walker, Sir L. | Macquisten, F. A. | Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn) |
| Forrest, W. | MacRobert, Alexander M. | Styles, Captain H. Walter |
| Foster, Sir Harry S. | Maitland Sir Arthur D. Steel- | Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser |
| Foxcroft, Captain C. T. | Makins, Brigadier-General E. | Sugden, Sir Wilfrid |
| Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E. | Margesson, Captain D. | Tasker, Major R. Inigo |
| Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony | Marriott, Sir J. A. R. | Templeton, W. P. |
| Galbraith, J. F. W. | Merriman, F. B. | Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton) |
| Ganzoni, Sir John | Meyer, Sir Frank | Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey) |
| Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South) |
| Glyn, Major R. G. C. | Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M. | Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell- |
| Goff, Sir Park | Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury) | Tinne, J. A. |
| Gower, Sir Robert | Murchison, C. K. | Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement |
| Grace, John | Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph | Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P. |
| Grattan-Doyle, Sir N. | Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) | Waddington, R. |
| Greene, W. P. Crawford | Nuttall, Ellis | Wallace, Captain D. E. |
| Grotrian, H. Brent | O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh | Warner, Brigadier-General W. W. |
| Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E. | Oman, Sir Charles William C. | Warrender, Sir Victor |
| Gunston, Captain D. W. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William | Waterhouse, Captain Charles |
| Hacking, Captain Douglas H. | Owen, Major G. | Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley) |
| Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne) | Pennefather, Sir John | Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle) |
| Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.) | Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings) | Watts, Dr. T. |
| Hanbury, C | Perkins, Colonel E. K. | Wells, S. R. |
| Harland, A. | Perring, Sir William George | Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H. |
| Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington) | Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple) | White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple |
| Haslam, Henry C. | Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome) | Wiggins, William Martin |
| Hawke, John Anthony | Pielou, D. P. | Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern) |
| Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley) | Pilcher, G. | Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay) |
| Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle) | Power, Sir John Cecil | Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham) |
| Hennessy, Major J. R. G. | Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton | Williams, Herbert G. (Reading) |
| Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford) | Preston, William | Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield) |
| Hills, Major John Waller | Price, Major C. W. M. | Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George |
| Hilton, Cecil | Radford, E. A. | Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl |
| Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G. | Raine, W. | Wise, Sir Fredric |
| Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard | Rawson, Sir Cooper | Wolmer, Viscount |
| Hopkins, J. W. W. | Rees, Sir Beddoe | Womersley, W. J. |
| Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities) | Reid, D. D. (County Down) | Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde) |
| Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Moseley) | Remer, J. R. | Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.) |
| Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S. | Remnant, Sir James | Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak) |
| Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N). | Rentoul, G. S. | Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L. |
| Hudson, R.S. (Cumberl'and, Whiteh'n) | Rhys, Hon. C. A. U. | Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T. |
| Huntingfield, Lord | Rice, Sir Frederick | Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich) |
| Hurd, Percy A. | Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y) | |
| Hutchison, G.A.Clark(Midl'n & P'bl's) | Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| Major Cope and Lord Stanley. |
§ Amendment made: In page 12, line 12, leave out the words "as on the first day of April."—[Colonel Lane Fox.]
§ Mr. DAVID DAVIESI beg to move, in page 12, line 18, to leave out Subsection (3).
This Sub-section repeals the provisions of Section 77 of the Act of 1911, in which 2002 provision is made for capital expenditure on pit-head baths. That capital expenditure has to be provided by the owners, if two-thirds of the men in a particular pit poll in favour of pit-head baths, and, with regard to maintenance, half the amount is to be found by the owners, and half by the persons employed in that par- 2003 ticular pit. This Sub-section also repeals Sub-section (5) of Section 20 of the Act of 1920. There was no intention in that Act, when the welfare fund was established, that the fund should provide for the maintenance as well as the capital expenditure on pit-head baths. I do not understand how the Government intend to provide for the pit-head baths if they repeal Section 77 of the Act of 1911 and Sub-section (5) of Section 20 of the Act of 1920. In the Committee stage, the Solicitor-General told us that the words in Clause 17 for the provision of accommodation and facilities included not only the capital charge but also the maintenance charge. I do not dispute his interpretation, because he is a lawyer, and I am not, but if he looks back to the Act of 1911 and the Act of 1920, he will see that the wording of both Acts is identical, and it is quite obvious that the meaning in both Section 77 of the Act of 1911 and Section 20 of the Act of 1920 only refer to capital expenditure, and do not include provisions for the maintenance of pit-head baths.
If that be so, then we may have the spectacle of the money which is being appropriated by the new fund provided by the royalty owners being applied without any means whatever for the maintenance of these baths, the provision of hot water and other things necessary in connection with them. In addition to that, whatever sum you take out of the Welfare Fund for the maintenance of the baths, will decrease the amount which is available for the erection of new baths. Therefore, I maintain that if the interpretation of the Solicitor-General be the correct one, it is a retrograde policy to repeal the provisions in the Acts of 1911 and 1920, because by so doing you will, obviously, reduce the amount of the £250,000 which has been allocated under the Bill for capital expenditure in the erection of pit-head baths. We were told by the hon. Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey) that he calculated that £10,000,000 would be required to provide these pit-head baths, and that it would take 40 years to establish them at every colliery. If from the capital funds there is to be taken the sum required for maintenance, there will be less money available, and it will take far longer to establish the baths. 2004 There is one other point I would like to touch on. That there is at present an obligation to supply the funds necessary for the maintenance of the baths by the management. There is also an obligation on behalf of the owners to erect these baths if, on a ballot, two-thirds of the persons employed ask that they shall be erected. I see no reason why this obligation should be removed, and why this particular Section should be repealed.
§ Mr. BATEYI beg to second the Amendment.
I would like the Minister in charge of the Bill to explain the reason for the repeal of Section 77 of the 1911 Act. That Section provides for the workmen to take a ballot, and, if two-thirds of the workmen by ballot vote in favour of the provision of baths, then the owners are compelled to erect the baths and to provide for the maintenance of them up to an amount of 3d. per workman per week. If that provision is to be repealed it seems to me that we shall have to rely solely upon this new welfare levy which will take 40 years to provide the baths. Would it not be wise on the part of the Government to leave this Sub-section so that where baths are not provided under the welfare levy the workmen will be able to ballot as before, and, if they so decide by ballot, then the baths will be available for them? Further, I would like the Minister to explain why it should be necessary to repeal paragraph (b) of Sub-section (5) of Section 20 of the Mining Industry Act, 1920? That paragraph says that the contribution of the workmen to the cost of maintenance shall be reduced, and it makes provision in certain circumstances for the contribution of the workmen to be reduced. I do not believe that we are going to get pit-head baths erected solely out of this welfare levy. I believe that if we are to get them within a reasonable time the workmen will have to contribute something towards the erection of the baths. If so, this paragraph (b) of Sub-section (5) of Section 20 of the Act of 1920 should be allowed to stand, so that the workmen's contribution can be reduced. I hope the Minister will explain the reason for the repeal of these two Sections.
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSThe object of Sub-section 3 is to leave out what 2005 was in a previous Act in order to tidy up matters. That is the only reason for the Sub-section. As matters stand now, the workmen contribute half the cost of maintenance, including interest on capital, the management of the baths is entrusted to a joint committee established under the Regulations, and the capital cost of the baths under this Section is provided by the owners, but where the total cost of maintenance, including interest, exceeds 3d. per man per week there is no obligation on the owner to provide the baths. The whole Section is now inoperative because the average cost of maintenance excluding interest is a shilling per man per week, and, as far as one can see, there is no reasonable probability of it ever falling below that figure. Section 77 is therefore entirely inoperative, and so we desire to repeal it, but, if there be any feeling on the part of hon. Members, and if it be thought that this might cause suspicion, I am quite content to accept the Amendment, although it is untidy, and I would much prefer to leave the Clause as it stands.
§ Mr. WALSHI was very pleased to hear the right hon. Gentleman's concluding remarks. It may very well be as was said in Committee that as things stand at present this is dead wood, but, as a matter of fact, this particular provision was discussed at very great length in the Committee in 1911, and it would be very inadvisable, to use no stronger expression, to take away from the mutual consent of both employers and workmen a method of erecting the baths which exists at present.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. KIDDI beg to move, in page 12, line 30, after the word "employment," to insert the words "or in the employment of shale mining."
In moving this Amendment, I had in view the peculiarly intimate relationship between shale mining and coal mining in Scotland. I do not share the view of those who think that there should be no restriction as regards coal mining, but I think I shall be able to show to the Scottish coalminers' representatives in this House that I have clearly stated the case for the shale miners. As Members opposite well know, the shale area in 2006 Scotland is confined to the county of Linlithgow in particular. There is really a large shale area there—
§ Mr. WALSHOn a point of Order. Having regard to the Preamble of this Bill, which states that this Bill is to make provision for facilitating the working of minerals and the better organisation of the coal-mining industry, may I ask if this Amendment is in order? I did not know before that shale was coal.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI had some doubts, and indeed my note on the Paper was, "This goes beyond the title of the Bill." I have since had some conversation with hon. Members, who point out that, if we allowed a discussion on shale mining, we should not be able to prevent a discussion on tin mining and on a number of other kinds of mining, which clearly would be outside the scope of the Bill. But I will hear what the hon. Member has to say on that point.
§ Mr. KIDDI am quite prepared to be regarded with a certain degree of suspicion for the simple reason that the only people acquainted with the shale miners really among the representatives of the miners here are the Scottish representatives. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] The only shale mining area in Great Britain is in the district I have mentioned, and I take it that the scarcity of shale is the very best consideration I can offer as to a very intimate knowledge of the shale mines. But that is not my point. There is a peculiarly intimate relationship between shale mining and coal mining, such as you have not between tin mining and coal mining, or between any other mining and coal mining. The shalefield lies normally about 300 yards below the lower carboniferous line of coal in Scotland. If that does not attract my hon. Friends opposite, I would explain to them that in the shale area you have a large force going through, with the result that the shale is brought up in such a position against the coal that you have the coal miner to-day being the shale miner to-morrow, and the shale miner to-day being the coal miner to-morrow.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is on the Amendment rather than on the point of Order which has been raised.
§ Mr. KIDDI want to say that the shalefield in Scotland is so intimate with coal that you have a coalfield in the centre of the shalefield. The result is that while the coal miner of yesterday is the shale miner of to-day, the shale miner of to-day is the coal miner of to-morrow, and under this Bill as now drafted the coal miner will not be allowed—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is again a speech on the Amendment. I am dealing with a point of order, as to whether or not this Amendment is within the scope of the Bill. I have already in the last few minutes spoken with some hon. Members who point out that, if shale mining be brought in, they will be able to move Amendments dealing with other kinds of mining, and I should not be able to resist them. Therefore, I am bound to conclude that the whole of the proposals are outside the scope of the Bill.
§ Mr. KIDDI submit respectfully that I was not really speaking on the Amendment. I was trying to explain the point which was raised as to whether this Amendment was in order, and the only way in which I could prove that it was in order was to discriminate between shale mining in relation to coal and tin mining in relation to coal and so forth. There is a peculiar relationship between shale mining and coal mining, and, if the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Fife (Mr. Adamson) were present, he would be able to support me in that matter. There is such a relationship between shale and coal as you have not between any other forms of mining and coal, and therefore I submit that there is nothing at all in this Bill to exclude me from bringing shale mining in.
§ Mr. R. S. HUDSONI am afraid I should be compelled to refer to iron-ore miners, and to use the same argument which the hon. Member is now putting forward in the case of shale, because the inter-connection between coal mining and iron-ore mining is almost as great if not greater.
§ Mr. SPENCERWe should also have to use that argument in regard to lead mines in Derbyshire.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESMay I point out that the statement that shale mining is 2008 limited to a certain area in Scotland is inaccurate. There are shale mines in Devonshire and in Somerset where very large schemes are now proposed for developing shale in that area, and this Amendment raises a large issue. If you bring in shale mining, certain other minerals, particularly tin, will have to come in.
§ 8.0 P.M.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have heard the hon. Member's description of the facts. While I was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt which was in my mind a short time ago, I must say that, having heard what he has to say has removed the doubt which was in my mind. I could not accept this Amendment as being within the scope and Title of the Bill. I must therefore rule it out
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton)I beg to move, in page 12, line 41, at the end, to insert the words
Provided that no such regulations shall impose restrictions on the engagement for employment of any person in actual receipt of a pension granted out of moneys provided by Parliament in respect of a disability arising out of his service with His Majesty's forces during the War.This is an Amendment which provides that no regulation made under this Clause shall impose restrictions on the engagement for employment of any person in actual receipt of a pension granted out of moneys provided by Parliament in respect of a disability arising out of his service with His Majesty's Forces during the War. Of course the House is well aware that during the War there was no industry which behaved more patriotically than the coalmining industry, and after the War there was no industry which did more to reinstate the men in the industry in employment when the War was over. It is also true that the coalmining industry had its own disabled men to deal with, but notwithstanding all that the Government do feel that the exclusion of disabled ex-service men would be contrary to the policy not only of this Government but of every Government since the War, and therefore I ask the Committee to accept the Motion.Amendment agreed to.