HC Deb 06 February 1934 vol 285 cc959-60
60 and 61. Mr. D. GRENFELL

asked the Secretary for Mines (1) whether, in view of the prevalence of miners' phthisis in the coal-mining industry, he will consider the compulsory adoption of wet drilling-machines for boring in all operations for blasting and removal of stone in coal mines;

(2) whether he will state the number of men certified to have been disabled by silicosis in the coal-mining industry from 1929 to the latest available date, and giving the numbers separately for the South Wales coalfield and the other mining districts?

Mr. E. BROWN

I am informed by the Home Office that since 1st June, 1931, when the coal-mining industry first came within the scope of the General Medical Board under the Silicosis Compensation Scheme, 432 men in the industry have been certified by the board to have been disabled or to have died from silicosis or from silicosis accompanied by tuberculosis; and that 385 of these cases occurred in the South Wales coalfield. Earlier comparable figures are not available. This extraordinary preponderance of cases of the disease in South Wales presents a very difficult problem, and no satisfactory explanation can as yet be given. As regards the more highly siliceous rocks, it is already compulsory to take dust prevention measures in drilling operations, while as regards other coal measure rock drilling machines are not used to any substantially greater extent in South Wales than in other coalfields. The application of a general measure of the kind proposed to drilling in all kinds of stone would not appear therefore to be an appropriate remedial measure.

Mr. GRENFELL

In view of the enormous number of disablement cases reported at the present time, does not the hon. Gentleman believe that it is the duty of his Department to provide means by which these cases can be avoided?

Mr. BROWN

The answer is that my first duty is to ascertain the facts. Since we received the report we have been constantly working on it. The hon. Member knows that one of our experts is working the whole time on this subject, and on the facts the hon. Member will see that it is not possible to take the line that he suggests.

Mr. GRENFELL

Is it not the duty of the Department to follow in this case the example of South Africa, where death and disablement from miners' phthisis have been wiped out?

Mr. BROWN

It would be unwise to draw a comparison without full knowledge in both cases.

Mr. GRENFELL

Is not the knowledge fully within the possession of the Department now? The knowledge is available to us, and the Department should have it.

Mr. BROWN

There is a vast amount of knowledge, but it leads to varying conclusions on the part of men who are experts from various points of view.

Mr. GRENFELL

Is it not the case that in South Africa miners' lives have been saved, while in this country lives are being lost in large numbers?

Mr. BROWN

I could not admit that. I can assure the hon. Member and the House that every effort is being made to arrive at a conclusion on which action can be taken. The hon. Member understands that these figures do not apply to cases arising since 1931. Some of them go back. Only since 1931 have certificates been given by this expert medical council. Before then cases were certified mostly by general practitioners.