HC Deb 21 February 1934 vol 286 cc334-5
37. Mr. D. DAVIES

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of violations of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, and the regulations provided under that Act, discovered as the result of the inquiries held to ascertain the cause of the colliery explosions at the Garswood Hall No. 9 colliery, Lancashire, 12th November, 1932, and at West Cannock No. 5 colliery, Staffordshire, 16th May, 1933; and, if there were violations, what action has been taken and with what results?

Mr. E. BROWN

The inquiries showed that the explosions in question resulted primarily from defects in ventilation. The reports of the inquiries were published. These and the available evidence were carefully considered at that time and I came then to the conclusion that I should not be justified in taking proceedings against the managements concerned under the Coal Mines Act. It was also concluded from both inquiries that the immediate cause of the explosions was incendive sparking from an unsafe signalling system. Precautions had been taken, but they were not effective; this was due, however, to lack of understanding of a very complicated and difficult problem. Within a fortnight of the publication of the report of the Garswood Hall Inquiry, I published an explanatory memorandum, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy, to make this problem easier to understand, and I have since taken other steps to simplify the position. Unfortunately, the explosion at West Cannock occurred on the same day as the memorandum in question was received by the management, and it was not possible for them to take in time the further precautions which might have prevented the explosion in this instance.

Mr. D. GRENFELL

Can the hon. Member say whether there is any connection between the information as to visits of inspection given in the previous answer and the implications in this question?

Mr. BROWN

The explanatory memorandum—if the hon. Member would like a copy I will see that he gets it—was sent to all owners and managers in May, 1933. It is difficult to deal with these complicated matters by way of question and answer.

Mr. GRENFELL

I want to know why there were the frequent visits mentioned in the previous reply unless there was something wrong in this pit?

Mr. BROWN

The answer is that the number of inspections was normal for a pit of this size.

HON. MEMBERS

No!

Mr. BROWN

Hon. Members have asked for the answer and I have given it.

Forward to