MINING INDUSTRY (AMENDMENT) BILL. (Hansard, 12 July 1939)

§ Mr. Gordon Macdonald
I want personally to welcome the Third Reading of this 2369 Bill. Ever since 1920, the Mines Department has suffered from the serious disability of having its expenditure limited to £250,000. I am satisfied that had there been no limitation of that nature during the last 19 years, much more could and would have been done by the Department. In a number of years, the expenditure has been near the maximum, and on one occasion it was within a thousand or so pounds of the maximum. When that is the situation, there has to be a retrenchment somewhere, and often it has been in directions which we think have caused the Mines Department to be less effective than it would otherwise have been. On Tuesday of last week, I put a question to the Secretary for Mines, to which he gave a very acceptable answer. That answer indicated that the Mines Department were alive to the need of doing certain things which we consider to be necessary. I realise that the suggestion I made then would lead to substantial expenditure, but now that the maximum has been removed, it seems to me that there is no limit, save that of the closed fist of the Treasury. I hope and believe that the Secretary for Mines will see to it that the extended powers which he now possesses will be used in certain definite ways which have been pressed upon his predecessors in years gone by.
One of the appalling features of the mining industry is the very heavy accident rate, and I hope that as a result of these extended powers, the hon. Gentleman will be able to take such measures as will reduce that very heavy rate. I realise that an increase in the number of inspectors will not of necessity bring about such a reduction, but I am satisfied that the reorganisation which the hon. Member outlined on Tuesday of last week will be some contribution towards reducing the accident rate. One of the reasons why I welcome the Bill so much is that this could not have been done without these provisions. There is, moreover, another aspect which has been brought to the notice of the Department by many hon. Members on this side of the House, and particularly by the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker). It is the question of overtime. I am satisfied that an increased inspectorate will find out about overtime in a way which the previous inspectorate could not do. We know that the inspectors have been very heavily worked. We have no fault to 2370 find, for they have done their job exceptionally well; but we are satisfied that a few more inspectors who could pay unexpected visits to different collieries an hour or so after the end of the shift would find that overtime is being worked to an extent that ought not to be allowed.
That is another reason why we welcome the Bill. It will enable the Mines Department to increase the inspectorate, and that increase will enable the inspectorate to do work which hitherto they have not been able to do. I hope that the Secretary for Mines will see to it that the question of what we consider to be illegal overtime—although I know there are differences of opinion as to its illegality—will be dealt with as the result of the passing of this Bill. We of the Miners' Federation heartily welcome the Bill. We realise that it is needed, and we hope that it will be used in such a way as, first, substantially to reduce accidents, and, secondly, to deal effectively with what we consider to be the illegal overtime that is now being worked in the mines.

§ Mr. Tinker
I want to welcome the Third Reading of the Bill and to compliment the Secretary for Mines on having brought forward a reform which ought to have been carried out long ago. It is evident from the Financial Memorandum that the Mines Department has been cutting itself to the bone in order to keep within the limits. In the mining industry, where there is such a high accident rate, one would have expected that no expense would have been spared to meet that difficulty, but it is evident from the Financial Memorandum that the Department has been tied down to a limit beyond which it could not go, because it was not allowed to do so by Parliament. It has now been found necessary to do something in that direction. In welcoming the Bill, hon. Members on this side hope that many of the things for which we have asked in the past will be attended to.
One of those matters is the inspectorate. We hope that there will be an increase in the number of inspectors, so that, not being overworked, they will be able to spend more of their time in the mines. In the past, the inspectors have had to come back and give their report, and in my opinion, they have not been able to give sufficient attention to the actual 2371 work in the mines. To understand a mine, the inspector must be on the spot and must be below ground, watching very closely what is taking place. Unless there is a fair number of inspectors to do that work, it is liable not to be done as it ought to be done. The accident rate increases because there is not sufficient supervision in the rush for profits. The men are called upon to do many things which would not be permitted if the inspectors knew of them. In many cases, the Mines Act needs to be strengthened, but even if it were carried out as it ought to be, the accident rate would be reduced. If only for that reason, we welcome the possibility of there being more inspectors as a result of this Bill.
I am very pleased to be able to compliment the Secretary for Mines on having used his influence, as I believe he has, by saying that if he had to take charge of this Department, he must have sufficient money behind him in order to see that the work of the Department is carried out properly. If he has done that, he deserves our gratitude. I hope that the provisions will be carried out fully, if only for the purpose of reducing the accident rate.

§ Mr. E. J. Williams
I do not want to recapitulate what was said in the Committee by hon. Members on this side, but I should like the Secretary for Mines to explain why a figure is inserted in the Bill, and also why it is such a small figure. Why could not the amount have been increased?

§ Mr. G. Macdonald
There is no figure in the Bill.

§ Mr. George Hall
It is very unusual to have a Bill dealing with the mining industry which can be regarded as non-controversial, as this Bill is. As my hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Mr. E. J. Williams) said, those of us who were Members of the Committee expressed our views on the Bill in the Committee. I want simply to point out to the Secretary for Mines that now there can be no excuse on the part of his Department for not proceeding with the very important work which all of us think should be done, not only with regard to safety, which is most important, 2372 but also with regard to the very important matter of research. The Bill is preliminary to a very much bigger Bill, which will deal with many aspects of the mining industry, and which, we trust, will be introduced by the hon. Gentleman during the next Session of Parliament, and will embody, not merely the main recommendations of the Royal Commission on Safety in Mines, but the whole of the recommendations. I want to say that the whole of the mineworkers of this country and the official organisation welcome this Bill, which will remove what many have regarded in the past as being the excuse for there not being greater activity on the part of the Mines Department.

§ The Secretary for Mines (Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd)
I wish to thank hon. Gentlemen for the support they have given me on this Bill. I think the hon. Member for Ogmore (Mr. E. J. Williams) will appreciate that the figure is only an estimate of the expansion of the mines inspectorate. I will pay special attention to that aspect of the duties of the inspectors which relates to overtime.