§ 55. Mr. C. EDWARDSasked the Secretary for Mines whether he will make the use of shielded detonators compulsory seeing that greater safety is assured in the packing and carriage, and in charging the shot-holes; and whether he is aware that their use does not alter the method of shot firing now obtaining, and that they also need no new appliance for their use?
§ Colonel LANE FOXI have nothing to add to the reply I gave to a similar question by the hon. Member on 20th July last. I myself, and both my predecessors, have given most careful consideration to this matter, and have sought the best expert advice, and I am quite satisfied that it is undesirable to make the use of shielded detonators compulsory.
§ Mr. BUCHANANWill the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider the setting up of a Committee to inquire into this matter, seeing that it is causing a good deal of concern among the mining population?
§ Colonel LANE FOXNo Sir, because I have already a most competent Committee of the technical experts to advise me, and they reported unanimously against this.
§ Mr. PALINGDoes that mean that the technical advisers have come to the conclusion that extra safety would occur as a result of the adoption of this method?
§ Colonel LANE FOXI do not quite put it that way. They have come to the conclusion that if the Regulations are properly carried out, that is far safer than introducing a compulsory use of these appliances.
§ Mr. PALINGIf it can be proved to this hide-bound Department that there is a safer method, is that a reason why they should not be put into operation, and if this thing were done would not the number of accidents decrease rather than increase?
§ Colonel LANE FOXIt is not a question of any Department being hide-bound, but a question of choosing between the advice of my technical advisers and the opinion of the hon. Gentleman. I prefer their advice.
§ Mr. PALINGHas not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman admitted that extra safety might ensue if this method were put into operation?