§ 30. Mr. James Griffithsasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has now received the reply of the Mining Association with reference to the operation of the Various Industries (Silicosis) Amendment Scheme, 1939; and whether he will state the nature of the reply?
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peake)As previously explained, my right hon. Friend was advised that he had no power to make the scheme retrospective. A collective undertaking of the kind indicated in the reply given to the hon. Member on 22nd June has been found to be impracticable; but I trust that, in view of the representations which have been made, any individual case that may arise will be sympathetically treated.
§ Mr. GriffithsAre we to gather from that reply that the Mining Association has refused to give an undertaking and have only indicated that if individual applications are made to certain colliery companies, they will raise no objection, but will encourage individual companies to operate the scheme?
§ Mr. PeakeMy approach was made through the Mining Association to the South Wales Coalowners' Association, because it is in that area that all the hard cases have arisen. The answer which I received was that some concerns were not members of the association, that, therefore, a collective undertaking could not be given and that the matter must be one for each individual colliery concerned.
§ Mr. GriffithsAre we to understand that the procedure now is that the representatives of the men in all these cases make application to the individual collieries concerned?
§ Mr. PeakeI very much hope, in view of the representations which I have made on this subject, that individual cases will be sympathetically treated by the collieries concerned.