HC Deb 04 May 1933 vol 277 cc1009-11
52. Mr. SMITHERS

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he will introduce legislation to amend the Coal Mines Act so that those pits which cannot use their quota may be compelled to part with it?

Mr. E. BROWN

I have no reason to think that the system of voluntary transfers of quota (provided for in each of the District Schemes in accordance with Section 3 (2) (e) of the Coal Mines Act, 1930) has given rise to serious abuse. I have received no representations from any executive board that an amendment such as that suggested by the hon. Member is required, and I would remind him that if such representations were made legislation would not be necessary to effect the necessary amendment in a district scheme.

Mr. SMITHERS

Is it not the fact that some collieries could raise and sell coal at a. profit, but are unable to do so because they cannot obtain the necessary quota?

Mr. BROWN

I should require to know the actual case in the hon. Member's mind. If he is thinking of some operations in South Wales I shall be dealing with that matter in reply to a, subsequent question.

Mr. PIKE

Will the hon. Gentleman call for evidence as to where the pits mentioned in the question are?

Mr. BROWN

If the hon. Member has any facts about any particular pits I shall be glad to see and consider them.

53. Mr. SMITHERS

asked the Secretary for Mines whether, in view of the fact that less coal is used by the Navy and that the standard tonnage of the Admiralty mines is based upon a former Admiralty demand, he will take steps either to reduce the quota for the Admiralty mines or to compel those mines to part with their quota?

Mr. E. BROWN

I think the hon. Member is under a misapprehension. The periods taken as a basis for calculating the standard tonnages of what are known in South Wales as Admiralty collieries are subsequent to 1926, by which time the heavy reduction in the coal requirements of the Navy had already taken place.

Mr. SMITHERS

Is it a fact that these collieries refuse to part with unexpended quota?

Mr. BROWN

I think again the hon. Member is under a misapprehension. In the South Wales coal trade the term "Admiralty colliery" means a colliery producing first-class steam coal suitable for the Navy, but not necessarily a, colliery whose output is solely or to a substantial extent used by the Navy.

Mr. SMITHERS

Is it a fact that these collieries refuse to part with their unexpended quota? May I have an answer to that question?

Mr. BROWN

It would depend entirely. The Act allows a voluntary sale of quota, and it is quite within the power of those who have excessive quota, if they consider that a demand is unreasonable, to refuse it.

Mr. SMITHERS

Then may I ask—

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member has had his quota.

54. Mr. SMITHERS

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he is aware that the mines in South Wales have quota allocated which they cannot use, and will not sell to those mines which can produce and sell their output but are unable to obtain quota; and will he take immediate steps to see that those mines which can raise and dispose of their coals at a profit are supplied with quota to enable them to work their mines on an economic basis, and consequently to absorb unemployed miners?

Mr. E. BROWN

I understand that the members of an organisation in the South Wales coalfield voluntarily restrict the production of their mines so far as they consider necessary to bring the total output in South Wales nearer to the estimated capacity of the market than is possible under a scheme covering the whole country. Clearly they would defeat their own purpose if they were to dispose of their surplus quota indiscriminately, but I understand that, where the requests for transfer of quota have been reasonable, such transfer to mines outside the organisation has taken place. I should add that in any case I have no power to take action in the matter.

Mr. SMITHERS

Does this not show that the whole quota system is a perfect farce?

Mr. BROWN

The answer is "No," because if the colliery concerned thinks it is unreasonably treated, it has power to go to impartial arbitration and have its standard tonnage increased.