HC Deb 05 September 1940 vol 365 cc48-82

4.55 p.m.

Mr. Lawson (Chester-le-Street)

Before the House adjourns, may I draw attention to a question which, while appearing small compared with the general review which the Prime Minister has made, is of considerable importance to certain industrial communities in this country? It may be my lot this afternoon to say some rather strong things about the treatment of certain workmen, or, rather, of those who are deprived of work at present. No one has seen with greater pleasure than I have the increase of employment throughout this country, but in the Special Areas, which have been hit for the last 10 years, there is rapidly developing a situation almost as bad as that which existed at the time when the Government took action in respect of those areas. It is all very well for great parts of the country, where people are working regularly, and in many cases receiving not only comparatively good wages but overtime as well; but the country and the Government have no right to forget those who are compelled by circumstances to be idle, sometimes for months at a time. In Durham and South Wales a situation is developing which is, to say the least, menacing so far as the good will of the people in respect of the war effort is concerned. Will the House believe that, while the unemployment figures generally have gone down this month, they have in limited areas in South Wales and Durham increased by some thousands, and that in some areas the miners have not done a day's work for the past 10 weeks? The concern which this fact is causing is illustrated by a letter that I received from a miners' lodge in my district after I had met a deputation. They are a body of miners who are very moderate in their outlook and opinions. They say: We have worked only eight days since the beginning of June and feel that something should be done urgently to prevent the rot which is becoming more and more apparent as the weeks pass on. … While we admit that the new conditions undoubtedly contributed to the present impasse we feel strongly that some measure of reorganisation should have now been effected, so that our members who are anxious to play their part in the war effort should have been found something to do. The fact that we have been idle for so weeks makes us wonder whether we are receiving the consideration and prominence to-day as was given to us or asked of us a few months ago? Or are we to feel that we are being neglected, that we are becoming a spent force? Here is a body of men unused to idleness, full of energy, and with a very strong will to play their part in the defeat of the common enemy. The sense of frustration that is abroad in these two mining areas is almost pitiful. In my own district, within a radius of 10 miles, there are no fewer than 10,000 miners idle. The unemployed miners number nearly 40,000. There are 19,000 miners idle in Durham, and I think the rest will be found in South Wales. But the people who have been rendered idle during the last few months are employed at the collieries which have been working regularly and are affected by the new conditions which now prevail. These people are not afraid of bombs—I speak with knowledge, because I have seen them during bombing and immediately afterwards —but they are terribly afraid of unemployment. With due respect to my hon. and very good Friend, no Government have the right to leave these people for 10 weeks without calling upon their services, particularly at the present time. Frankly, something has to be done. Although the enemy cannot get Fifth Column representatives into this country, we would certainly be doing him a good turn by allowing this situation to continue and letting our people go sour. My experience is that bitterness is growing. Long before now the Government ought to have been taking definite notice of this question. Nobody has been there from the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Mines, and nobody has said to these men that they have had any responsibility. I have occupied some responsible positions in my own area during the past 12 months, and I can tell the House that this situation is so bad that, if it is not met, I propose to give the whole of my time to trying to compel the Government to meet it.

It may be asked, What can be done? My right hon. Friend, very early, gave me a letter saying that the miners could go to other work. The Government have rightly said—and I support them—that certain men should be limited to certain work; that miners should be limited to the mines. The younger men have been reserved from the Army. Miners have been working in the pits at about half the wages that some workers are receiving in munition work. It is a well-known fact that the miner on the whole receives less in wages than those workers who are employed directly as a result of the war, but the miners have not complained. It is to their credit that they have not said anything about it. But they are limited to the mines. Could the House believe that it was necessary to ask the Secretary for Mines and the Minister of Labour to relieve these men so that they could go to other work? The Secretary for Mines was kind enough to send me a very explicit letter, as did also the Minister of Labour, saying that these men could go to other work, but recently when miners have got work in munition factories or at other places out- side the mines, they have been refused their green cards by the Ministry of Labour.

There is scarcely a miner of my acquaintance who has got work in this way who has not had to come to me. A well set-up young man came to me last week. He had offered himself for service in the Air Force. The Air Ministry had grabbed him. They were very pleased to have a young man of that type offering himself for service. He is about 20 years of age, well set-up, very intelligent and industrious. He has enlisted in the Air Force on condition that he can get released from the mines, and the Ministry of Labour refuses to give him his green card even to join the Forces. That is a ridiculous position. It looks very much like the result of indecision, wherever the responsibility lies, as far as the Government are concerned. Is there any sense in having the Minister of Supply appealing over the wireless for increased pressure on the part of munition workers to work 12 hours a day and seven days a week, when, side by side, there are hardy, industrious adult workers who want to do some work but cannot get it? I suggest to my right hon. Friend that it is time that the Government had a system of work sharing, and I do not limit that merely to sharing the output of coal. Something should be done in that direction. There are all kinds of national factories and munition works where both men and women are working overtime, in some cases until they complain of exhaustion, and yet our men are refused an opportunity of playing their part in the national effort and sharing the work which is going. My hon. Friend may say that these men will be wanted at some time. That may be, although I doubt it. If they are wanted, no Government has the right to stand by and allow them to be idle merely because they may be wanted in the distant future. These men were being asked a few weeks ago to give of their best. They are so enthusiastic in their desire to participate in the service of the country that in my own county they have actually given out of their funds two Spitfires to the country.

The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell)

And ambulances, too.

Mr. Lawson

And a considerable amount for ambulances too. These people ought to receive immediate attention. My hon. Friend may have some answer to all this. The only answer would be to get these men work. He may be able to make some suggestion as to what should be done in some vague future. My complaint is that nobody comes near to these men. No representative of the Government has taken steps to explain the position on the spot. The Ministry of Labour actually seems to be taking steps which hinder men from taking work when they have the opportunity of getting it. I am not an advocate of transference. I know that men have received that offer. Transference is not a very pretty idea in peace time, and it does not seem to be very hopeful in war time. There is work going and men are idle and have been so for 10 weeks. A new Special Area has now developed, and the country apparently cares just as little about that special area as it cared about the old ones. I ask my hon. Friend, and at least my Labour friends in the Government, to see to it that an end is put to this situation very quickly. If it is not then there can be no more likely centres of disaffection and despondency than will he found among the groups of men in these colliery areas. It is not that they have any towards this country, but unless this problem is settled the Government will be responsible for that situation.

5.15 p.m.

Mr. S. O. Davies (Merthyr)

I want to express my personal thanks to my hon. Friend for having raised this most important subject this afternoon. We all sensed and felt with him his difficulties in getting lip after the great statement made by our Prime Minister, but there is, nevertheless, in the situation that he has so strongly and justifiably referred to a great deal that cannot be dissociated from the war effort which is being made in this country. There is no section of the working-class population in this country which is more anxiously ready to make the maximum contribution towards our war effort than the miners of this country, but, on the other hand, while they are about the least squeamish section of our population, they are, possibly, as a result of their environment and their experiences, the most impatient section of the people of this country. Once it is driven home by circumstances that they are receiving a raw deal, then we know from experience that we will have a very difficult lot to handle.

As my hon. Friend said, there is a profoundly conscious desire on the part of the miners of this country to make a maximum effort, and they cannot understand why the product that they are called upon, and are willing, to produce is not being used on a much larger scale and in an infinitely less chaotic fashion than it is being handled to-day. I know that the great historical happenings which have taken place have upset the somewhat uncertain equilibrium which existed in the industry up to a few months ago, but what makes the miners most anxious is this: They are not satisfied with the effort which is being made to bring back into the industry some measure of organisation or better equilibrium than exists at present. My hon. Friend has rightly complained—and I share his feelings entirely—about the unemployment of the miners. Side by side with that unemployment is, in some parts of the coalfields of this country, a considerable amount of over-employment. Overtime is being worked to such an extent that it is an absolute disgrace to the industry. I find it so within my own coalfields, where, as the Secretary for Mines knows, some collieries have been largely idle for several weeks. Quite near to them I see in my travels men from the day shift returning late in the afternoon and in the early hours of the evening, and I know there is considerable pressure being brought to bear on many miners to work at week-ends. I am not referring to the continuous shift workmen at all, but between one coalfield and another, and even within the same coalfield, these contradictory influences are at work.

May I very respectfully be permitted to say this? I am a lifelong friend of the Secretary for Mines, with whom I have had the greatest pleasure in working in my own coalfield for many years past, indeed, for more years than we are very anxious to count just now. I know the added difficulties which are immediately confronting him, so far as some of our coalfields are concerned, and I know that the winter months will make a problem in some parts of the country more difficult than at present, but I cannot possibly see that the conditions in our coalfields will be improved unless my hon. Friend is determined upon a complete reorganisation of coal production and distribution, and has a central authority, with real authority, so that the whole activities of our coalfields shall be coordinated and directed by one body. Unless that is done, the competition that still exists between coalfield and coalfield will continue, although I admit that some good measures have been taken, up to a point, to reduce that competition. I should be more than delighted to find that that authority is the Department over which he presides. Unless the suggestion I have made is carried out, I cannot see the remotest possibiity of the present chaos being removed. There is no earthly reason why coal mines or coalfields should be working more than their normal time, while others, producing coal equally as rich and as varied in its qualities, should be working either half time, a little more than half time or not at all.

I feel that I should be wasting the time of the House if I merely dilated upon the present situation, but I would ask my hon. Friend to take this step and to encourage other uses for coal. There could be a substantial contribution towards the mining industry of this country if coal was used on the roads of this country in vehicles instead of the petrol that is being imported, although I know the difficulties of getting other materials to exploit that idea. I know the Secretary for Mines is up against it; the war conditions of the last three or four months have made his problem extremely difficult, but he must take possession of the mining industry of this country and have one central authority if the mass of contradictions that exists now is to be removed and there is to be an end to the stupid inhibitions that are handicapping the industry at the moment.

5.27 p.m.

Mr. David Adams (Consett)

The House is greatly indebted to the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) for having raised this vital question to-day, and he has so effectively covered the ground that so far as the statistical position is concerned there is not a great deal to say of the unemployment of large numbers of miners, particularly in the North of England. The constituency which I represent—Consett and the County of Durham generally—is probably more severely hit by the present situation than any other section of our coal fields. The loss of our export markets undoubtedly makes the situation most acute and difficult, and the House will sympathise with the Secretary for Mines in particular, and with the Government in general. Nevertheless, we believe that measures can be taken to deal with it. During the short Recess I have been invited to meet deputations of colliery owners as well as colliery workers, and while not presuming to be in any sense a technologist, or to impinge on the rights of the workers' associations, certain views have been expressed which may be in harmony with the views that the Minister himself holds. One need not enlarge on the fact that at -the moment a number of the collieries in Consett and County Durham generally are shut down and that large numbers of workers who were working short time have received 14 days' notice to terminate their employment.

That situation is very ominous in view of the attitude which the Government have hitherto adopted with regard to mine workers. Certain men who have received notice have advised me that they have had opportunities of full employment in other collieries and in other occupations, and that this has been specifically refused by their colliery owners. This seems as though they were chained to the mines until they received their notices. If for national reasons men must be retained in any particular occupation and cannot seek adequate and full employment elsewhere, in my view they are entitled to full remuneration during the time that they may be unemployed. That may seem an unorthodox view, but it is carried out in the case of ambulance drivers and others who must stand by in case of urgent military and other necessities, and what is sound for one section of the community owing to enemy action ought to be equally good as far as mining is concerned.

The Minister states in a communication to me dated 16th August that it is our policy to share orders as far as possible. Is this the key to the disabilities under which the Northern coalfields are suffering? Certainly the coalowners have declared that that would in their judgment solve the problem of equitable distribution of all orders which are available throughout the industry. The Minister will be able to say whether that is or is not practicable. The owners contend that Durham and Northumberland coal is almost as good as the coal at present being consumed for domestic and industrial purposes and that, if a strong stand were taken with consumers—and the Ministry have powers to take whatever stand they think fit—this coal could be sent from Northumberland and Durham to different parts of the country. They advised me, with what accuracy I cannot say, that if such a distribution were made in face of the orders currently held and anticipated, it should not mean more than a day's short time throughout the whole industry. The Prime Minister used the excellent phrase, as far as the situation generally is concerned, "We all stand in together." That must apply to the mining industry also, and, if this strong stand that we call for is taken and they insist that our coal shall be sent to other parts of the country in order to employ our miners, that would be a solution of the problem. The Secretary for Mines stated in reply to a question: I am bound to ask domestic consumers in Northern Ireland, equally with those in other parts of the United Kingdom, to be prepared to use the same proportion of types and sizes of coal to which they are not accustomed."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 20th August, 1940; col. IIII, Vol. 364.] If that applies to Northern Ireland and to domestic coal, it equally applies to other parts of the United Kingdom and to domestic and to industrial consumers also. Of course, there would be resentment shown by these consumers at having to make some departure from their normal consumption of particular classes of coal, but I am advised upon careful investigation that this is not an insuperable difficulty and that Northumberland and Durham coal, although largely of the coking variety, could be consumed industrially. If that is so, it is surely an imperious obligation upon the Secretary or Mines to take that stand and to undertake the unpleasant task of forcing this view upon consumers. In fact he obtains at once, with some relatively small sacrifice, by compulsion it is true, a solution of the problem of the distribution of orders generally and a solution of what may prove a very serious detriment to the sense of loyalty which is current among the mining section. We want no such change. We want the magnificent spirit that prevails there, and the indomitable characteristics of the North, to be preserved, but we warn the Government that it will inevitably be sapped if, in the face of possible remedies, you force heavy unemployment on this most industrial section of the community.

5.37 p.m.

Miss Ward (Wallsend)

I believe in proper and adequate planning for the mining industry, and I noticed the other day a case in relation to employment in the mines which I think merits investigation. A man who had been a stoker in the Navy, and had been employed subsequently on ships' trials at a very big shipyard as a stoker, went into the pits, I think since the war began, and was very anxious to come out and get back to the particular job in which he was skilled. I applied to the Ministry of Labour and was refused on the ground that the man is in a reserved occupation and that no one apparently wishes to use his services in the job for which he is really skilled, and consequently he must remain in the pits. If pit men who have worked in the collieries for years are to be put out of employment, it seems to me it would be a wise scheme, first of all, to see whether men who are not by profession pit men could not be absorbed into the industries for which they have adequate training. I suggest that my hon. Friend should investigate this side of employment in the mines.

A rumour has reached me, as rumours do, though I believe this is true, of a new scheme which is being fathered by the distributors, with the consent and good will of the Mines Department, to improve the distribution of coal. This is a very important question, and we would all wish to give the hon. Gentleman every possible support in seeing that there is no recurrence of what happened last winter. That the scheme had the support, and must have been within the knowledge, of the Mines Department is borne out by the fact that a very important official in the Department is going to be the director. I am a little uncertain, because trying to find out what the plans of a Government Department really are is almost beyond the human mind and the human machine. The scheme was either put forward by the distributors or by the merchants, or by the Mines Department, or all of them, but it was unacceptable, and part of it has been withdrawn. I am certain that the part for improving the distribution of coal will be welcomed by all sections of the community, but I ask for an assurance that no scheme will be launched which involves the whole organisation of the coal industry unless adequate and proper consultation has taken place between the interests concerned, that is to say, the Mining Association and the Miners' Federation. Whether the distributors and merchants are part of the Mining Association or are represented by the Miners' Federation is almost beyond the lay mind, but when very vast and wide powers are being conferred, rightly, on the Government during the war, it is essential that no scheme shall be launched unless all parties concerned have been consulted and have been given an opportunity of hammering out a common policy which will be of benefit to all sides.

I am certain the hon. Gentleman knows all the innuendoes connected with the remarks that I am making. I only ask that we shall not be faced with a fait accompli and that all the interests concerned shall have an opportunity of studying the details of the scheme and expressing their view of it before it is launched. The original scheme raised a good deal of controversy. Having tramped around the streets of Whitehall from one Government Department to another, I am becoming a very wise woman. I have learnt a very great deal in the nine years that I have been in the House of Commons; I know the extraordinary things that go on inside Government Departments, and I know the barrier that there is between Government Departments and the House of Commons. Sometimes Members of Parliament know things which Government Departments would rather they did not know. All I ask is an assurance that all interests shall be consulted, and I am certain that we shall get a scheme which will be agreeable to everyone and which will avoid the difficult position which was created last winter and which will be of general benefit to the community.

5.44 p.m.

Sir Cuthbert Head lam (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, North)

I have rather more faith in Government Departments than the hon. Lady. Perhaps that is because I have been in one and she has not. But I realise that she is of a hopeful disposition and, though she may not have the confidence in Departments that I have, I think she will accord to the Minister the compliment of supposing that if he is making any arrangements such as she suggests, he would have the common sense to consult all those who are interested. I am very glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) introduced this subject to-night, because although I no longer represent a mining constituency, I live in a coal area, and I am very much in touch with the situation in the north of England generally. I realise that there is much truth in what the hon. Member said, and that the situation of the miners, in the County of Durham particularly, is a difficult one at the present time. We do not want to have any repetition of the state of things that existed in the northern counties after the last war, and unless the matter of coal production and distribution is better thought out than it has been in the past, I am pretty certain we shall be face to face with those conditions when the war is over. Therefore, I suggest that the present time is a good opportunity for those who are connected with the coal industry and for the Ministry which serves the coal industry to work out plans for the future and to make ready for the times that are ahead.

My opinion is that at the present time a great many miners are surplus in the county of Durham for the simple reason that the export trade in coal has gone down so enormously. The first duty of the Government is to try by every means in their power to increase the export of coal. Although the field for export in Europe is much reduced, there should be opportunities in South America, particularly, where we might increase very largely our coal exports. I am convinced that the Minister will have a word to say about that, because it is really the whole point as far as Durham is concerned. Our coal is largely export coal; although it can be used as other coals are used for other purposes in England and the British Isles generally, it is mainly an export coal. The Germans were obliged to use our coal for many purposes in the old days, and I have no doubt they suffer from the loss of it at the present time, but until better times come in Europe, it is clear that if we are to get new markets they must be in another hemisphere. That is the main direction in which, if I were Minister, I would direct my mind at the present time. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Wallsend (Miss Ward) that is would be a good thing if we could improve the distribution of coal throughout the country, and I should like to know from the Minister whether he has made arrangements which he considers to be satisfactory for a better supply of coal throughout the country during the coming winter. In my opinion, there was last year a deal of suffering which would have been quite unnecessary if there had been any forethought or provision. I am not attacking the Minister for that, because he was not responsible for what was evidently gross mismanagement. If we could utilise Durham and Northumberland coal for distribution in England, Ireland and Scotland for other purposes than those for which it has been used before, it might help our trade considerably.

But it is obvious that, however much we strive to the contrary, there will be a great deal of unemployment in certain mines in the country, for the time being, at any rate. Therefore, miners who are so willing should be allowed to join His Majesty's Forces. They should be allowed to find other forms of work on the understanding, of course, that if their services are required again in the mines, they will come back to the mines. There is a feeling among certain people, the mine owners in particular, and to a certain extent, I understand, the Ministry, that if miners once get away from the mines, it may be difficult to get them back again. There may be something in that, but at the present time it is a risk that should be taken. Every man in the mining industry who cannot be employed as a miner ought to be allowed to find work of some other kind, and more especially ought to be invited or moved to join His Majesty's Forces. As the Prime Minister warned us in his speech this afternoon, there is no reason why every man who can do so should not make himself trained for the tasks that may be ahead of us. Let me conclude by saying that I do not agree with the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street or the hon. Member for Consett (Mr. D. Adams) that there is any danger of the miners in Durham or Northumberland becoming so disgruntled as to lose faith in their country or becoming useless members of society. I know how keen they are to do their work, I know how miserable they are at the thought of not being able to do their work, but I have a high enough opinion of their loyalty and courage to know that, whatever happens, they can be depended upon to protect their country.

5.51 p.m.

The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell)

I should be happy if my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) were present, because I want to acknowledge the very kind words he addressed to me and the way in which he approached me on this very serious question affecting the County of Durham and South Wales. This trouble is really localised. I am glad to find that at this time I can sit on this side of the House without being out of step or out of harmony with the opinions of my old friends opposite. There is a great deal of justification for some of the complaints that have been made, but the justification will not be assessed in its right proportion unless we take a general view of the whole problem. Speaking for the Mines Department, I would say that to-day we are more concerned about production and distribution than ever before in the history of the Department. We have undertaken certain obligations towards industry, and I am glad to be able to say that the relations between the Department and both sides of the industry have never been happier than they are at the present time, and that the relations between the two sides of the industry are far happier than I can ever remember them before. I can only attribute this fact to the common loyalty and common desire of both sides to play their part in this crisis.

When I came to the Department, I found certain problems the nature of which I knew before I arrived. Let me refer first to the general measure of our production and what it implies to us in this struggle; how important it is in the structure of our war machine, and what an important contribution it has made to the whole superstructure of the national effort which the country has built up in the last year or two. At the end of one year of war, we are producing at a rate per annum greater than a year ago. We are now producing, with a smaller number of men, more coal per individual working shift and more coal in the aggregate than we have produced for many years past. I do not think it necessary to give details of the figures of production. My hon. Friends know them as well as I do up to 1939. They have been withheld since the war began, because it is not an advantage to publish too widely details of our war effort either in the mines or anywhere else. We are at the present time producing substantially more than we were 12 months ago. In a certain period in 1940 we have produced 3,000,000 tons more than we did in the same period of 1939. It should be a great comfort to us and a great reinforcement of our confidence to know that in proportion to our population we are producing a larger quantity of coal, a larger measure of motive power, a larger volume of industrial power, than any other country in the world has ever done.

We are producing now at the rate of five tons per head of the population each year and consuming for purposes of all kinds at the rate of four tons per head of the population. No country in the world has ever enjoyed command over such power as we enjoy in the production and possession of this regular output of coal. It is the secret of our war strength. A short while ago the Brussels wireless broadcast a German boast that Germany had invaded and overrun all the coal-producing countries of Europe except Soviet Russia, and that Germany had raised the production of coal under her control to 350,000,000 tons a year. That figure is somewhat larger than ours, but the 350,000,000 tons so produced have to serve the needs of over 300,000,000 people on the continent of Europe. When one divides the number of tons by the number of people who have to depend upon that coal for power, warmth and light, one finds that the continent of Europe under German domination has no more than one ton per head of the population, while we use every day for our comfort and strength four times as much. In addition, we have abundant supplies of liquid fuel in this country. The Germans have to consume some of their raw coal to provide themselves with liquid fuel. When all that has been done, there are reports of deprivations and hardships in all parts of the German-occupied territories.

I have great pride in this industry to which I belong. My hon. Friends and I belong to this industry as we belong to nothing else on earth. It is an industry to which we have given the best years of our lives. We shall never have those years again. My hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street made me feel old when he referred to the long years when we worked together in happy association; those were the days of youth, and not the days of old age. In this industry the question of personnel is vital to production. One cannot train a miner in a few months; indeed, the time necessary for training a soldier is very much shorter than the time required to train a miner. One cannot make a job of that training unless the man is trained in a variety of occupations and under a variety of circumstances which may last five to 10 years. I was a far better miner after 15 years than I was after five years. The personnel of the mining industry can do their work. They are adaptable people, but they are better in the mines than anywhere else. I am trying to adapt myself, but I shall never be as good at this Box as I was in the pit. That is our trade, a highly skilled trade calling for considerable experience.

I had to safeguard the personnel of the industry if we were to achieve our mission in this great national effort. My predecessor had set up a committee. He had called in the aid of Lord Portal, and investigations had been made in each of the producing districts. The National Production Council was in process of being formed, and the organisations of employers, and the Miners' Federation had come together with a view to raising the power of production to meet the demands coming from France. This was a larger demand than w e had ever had to meet. The request from France was that we should multiply by three times our normal quantity of coal exports. The Mines Department and the industry prepared to face this responsibility. I came to the Department after the scheme had been launched, but I, too, had to play my part. I recognised the first thing was to try to obtain sufficient of all three vital factors of production—first, labour; second, material; and third, pit room. The country should realise the nature of modern mining. It is very hard work, and mechanisation has not made it easier but more onerous. Output has been considerably increased by the aid of mecha- nisation, and we are now producing in this country, despite our inconveniences, 25 per cent. more coal per man than in the year 1918. Whereas we had 50 per cent. more men in those years to produce the coal.

I recognised that there was a limit to the amount of work to be exacted from each of the workers. I recognised that there was no question of increasing the hours of work, and that every man must work within the limits of steady "workability." To do that we needed more men in the industry. This was necessary if we were to fulfil our promise and supply to France all the coal she needed and also to maintain our exports to South America, Portugal and Canada and pay for our essential imports from all parts of the world. We required not only to keep all our men, but to add at least 40,000 or 50,000 more. I saw the Minister of Labour on this point. He has been involved in solving this problem, and I acknowledge his very great assistance and his understanding of the subject.

Mr. Lawson

Can the Minister tell us why the Minister of Labour's Department is not represented to-day? I gave special notice about this matter, and they should be here to reply on the question of men who have been refused work.

Mr. Grenfell

I made inquiries yesterday morning, and was told that the Minister would not be back until Monday next. However, it may be my fault because I really did not know that we were to concentrate so much upon this aspect of the subject. As I say, I asked the Minister to help me in obtaining the men, and he very sensibly asked, "Will you tell me what you want?" He pointed out that there was a Schedule of Reserved Occupations, for which he was not responsible, designed to conserve the necessary labour for each industry. "Do you want a larger number than you have at present?" he asked. I told him that I needed about 40,000 or 50,000 more men. I told him that we needed at least 800,000 men if we were to produce 20,000,000 to 24,000,000 more tons of coal. I made a personal appeal, and the result was that we had the assistance of the Minister of Labour, and an instruction was issued on 10th June that men were not to leave the mining industry. We could not increase the personnel in the industry if men were to be allowed to leave it freely. We issued invitations and gave inducements, and, indeed, there was a form of pressure to be applied to bring men back, to increase the number of 760,000 to round about 800,000. This instruction was sent out on 10th June. The hon. Member for Consett (Mr. D. Adams) the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street and the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. S. O. Davies) and all in the mining industry ought to know that the instructions were explicit and well understood by all the men in all the districts at that time. No clearer explanation of these terms could have been given than was contained in a pamphlet issued by the Durham Miners' Association. Everyone in Durham knew the terms on which men were expected to stay in or to leave the industry. We wanted to get men back into the industry because as long as there was work they would stay there. In the case of trained men who came under the reserved occupation schedule they were expected to stay in the mines.

Then came the change. It is a story known to Members in this House. It was the cessation of demands from Europe. Europe was cut off. Holland, Belgium and France fell, and, unhappily, as a consequence there was no door for the admission of British coal except to Portugal. It meant that 2,000,000 tons a month were cut off as an "exportable possibility." We found we had no need for more men and that there was actually a surplus of coal in the export trade. My hon. Friends are entitled to express disappointment and even indignation that men in the coalfields, some in South Wales, have not worked a day, or only a few days, since 24th June. Men in Durham and the North have worked very little and have not been able to augment very appreciably their unemployment benefit, which has been the limit of their incomes during this time. We all regret it, and I am very sorry indeed about it, but we want to view it in its right perspective. These are victims of war conditions over which the Minister and the Government have no control.

Automatically, probably because of my old views, my mind turned at once to the possibility of sharing work—that is sharing work within districts and between the more prosperous districts and those who have become the victims of these unhappy changes in Europe. There are some cases in the Midland areas in the quarter just ended where they have pro- duced very much more coal than they did in the corresponding quarter of last year. They have never worked so regularly, and never produced so much coal for household use in the summer. And so our minds turned naturally to the possibility of sharing orders, and giving everyone a chance, instead of keeping some people idle. But we came up against problems which we cannot eliminate and overcome. There is the problem, for instance, of divergences in quality between one pit and another. All my hon. Friends know quite well that it is no use asking gasworks to take dry steam coal or railway companies to burn steam coal which is not strong enough to stand the strain of the forced draught of locomotive boilers. You cannot send to a gasworks, coal which contains no by-products. The solidity of the coal industry in this country is due to the fact that we have a greater variety of coal for industrial purposes than any other part of the world.

Then there is the problem of transport, and that is not an easy problem. Our internal consumption of coal has been very much higher than it was in recent years, and we have had to shift about on our railways very much more coal than before. Further, there have been the restrictions on coastwise shipping. The Ministry of Transport met our requests from time to time and a record number of trains have been sent from the extreme North to the South. Never before has so much Durham and Northumberland coal come by rail into the London area and into the South. We have sent coal from South Wales to Lancashire and into areas where formerly it was not burnt. We made appeals to people to use the next best quality of coal available where they have not been able to obtain their usual supply. Although Durham and South Wales have lost between one-third and one-half of their previous orders, the loss of employment in Durham has, on an average, been one day a week during the last 10 weeks, and in South Wales it has hardly been half a day a week. My hon. Friends may ask what that means to a body of men who are not getting any work at all. We do not want to overload our transport system and to be unable to deliver the large quantities required for home consumption in addition to the coal we are trying to send abroad. I am sure I could convince my hon. Friends with figures that large quantities of Durham coal are being taken to markets where it formerly did not go. Large quantities of South Wales coal are also going to such markets.

I do not see how we can get all these pits fully employed even if we listened to all the appeals that are made to us. Suppose that I said I would divide the whole output of all the pits among the men and found it worked out at five and two-thirds shifts a week. Suppose I then said that five and two-thirds shifts should be worked in every pit. Is it assumed that this would solve the problem of men who want to migrate from the mining industry, or of the men who are attracted by higher wages in the munition works? It would not. Complaints come to me in large numbers from pits where men are given the chance to work full time. They cannot hold their men. I could name pits where men are leaving because there is more remunerative work in the neighbourhood. It is natural that men should want to leave and we know why men want to leave the mining industry if they get the chance. This problem, therefore, is not solved by simply arriving at a flat arithmetical division of the orders for coal and of dividing the opportunities for work between the men in all the coalfields.

We have two months or more during which we can carry on a very extensive stocking programme. I want to assure the House then when the surplus coal made its appearance, when we called back from the high seas the coal that was being sent to France and we saw the door shut against our exports, we devised steps to distribute the coal at home. Every week in the last month and the previous month we have been adding to the stocks of this country at the rate of no less than 750,000 tons a week. One-third of that was added to the stocks of household consumers, either in their coal houses or in the yards of the merchants. At least 250,000 tons a week is being added to household stocks, while stocks for electricity and gas works have been totalling up week by week regularly. We have now saved up in this country for any emergency that may occur no less than 22,000,000 tons of coal, in addition to the coal that is nearly always liable to be standing round the pitheads amounting to 3,500,000 tons. That stock will be added to day by day, unless something happens to prevent it. The House should remember the special conditions under which we live and we should not blind ourselves to the possibilities of accidents of all kinds. I am not sure that there might not be interruptions with rail transport which would considerably curtail the movement of coal, or that there might not be interruptions with road transport.

The Mines Department are anxious to keep all the mines in production as long as possible. The hon. Member for Con-sett quoted some words of mine. I will use them again, and say that we would not like to allow any pit to go out of production or the possibility of production, until we have a guarantee that all wants are supplied. While we are stocking we are trying to share work. I can assure my hon. Friends that we have really shared work, although it has not been as complete as I would like. I know what happens in the coal districts and I am anxious, if we can, to find these men something to do, even temporarily. Conversations are now taking place between officers of my Department and officers of the Ministry of Labour. I shall see the Minister of Labour next Monday, and I hope it will be found possible to let men go to other industries if they wish. I shall not dictate the terms on which men will be released. Suppose, say, in Durham or South Wales men have not been able to get three or four days' work for some months and there is no prospect that they will get work, they will be regarded as fit for transference elsewhere.

Mr. Cordon Macdonald (Ince)

Will that privilege be confined to pits that are closed down?

Mr. Grenfell

I said pits in which work could not be found. In those cases men will be allowed to transfer to other districts or to join the Army voluntarily. A large number of men want to join the Army and we shall lose the cream of our manhood in the industry because of men going into the Army unless we can find regular work for them. Hon. Members must not assume that the Mines Department or the Miners' Federation or the Coalowners' Association want to keep men in the coalfields out of the Army. The miners are not that type. We must, however, keep the industry going, for it is the groundwork of all our war preparations and war machine. We must keep young men in the industry because the old men cannot do the job, and if we raise the age of reservation it will cripple the industry. It must be remembered that these men will be taken not only from pits working slack time, but from pits which are producing to maximum capacity. We are discussing with the Minister of Labour how far w can relax the terms of the instruction sent out by him, in order that men who are unable to get a decent livelihood may go from the industry, on the understanding that if they are wanted back again in some reasonable term of time, they will come back.

Mr. Lawson

In his discussions with the Minister of Labour will my hon. Friend take into consideration the possibility of sharing the work in the munitions factories? In my own area there is a large munitions factory where people work overtime. Side by side there are good men who have done nothing for three months. Why cannot the shifts in factories like that be increased so that these men could be given work?

Mr. Grenfell

I am not entitled to say what should be done in the Ministry of Labour factories or in private factories for which the Ministry provides labour. I think I should confine myself to my own job.

Mr. George Griffiths (Hemsworth)

Does not the Minister know that in mines in certain parts men are working overtime practically every day?

Mr. Grenfell

Yes, but I am sure that the volume of overtime spread over the whole is not very large. It does not mean more than a fraction of a shift a day spread over the whole industry.

Mr. Griffiths

The men feel that it is not contrary to the law to work 8, 9 or 10 shifts a week.

Mr. Grenfell

More than six shifts a week can be worked by law and when there are special payments for afternoon and night shifts eight shifts may be done without violating the law. That is, however, purely an internal question into which I will not enter. I have tried to convince the House that the stocking programme has prevented worse results from developing but I am convinced that something much more must be done.

The next point to which I will refer is that raised by the hon. Member for Wall-send (Miss Ward). She has succumbed to the propaganda which has been very active from certain quarters and she was persuaded, until I saw her this afternoon, that this scheme of the Mines Department was a revolutionary measure which might inflict great injury upon the industry and and impair considerably the efforts of those responsible for the production of coal. I can assure the hon. Lady that there was never any intention of refusing to take into consultation those who produce the coal. There was no reason why the Miners' Federation should be asked to discuss the details of the scheme. It was of course proper that they should be informed that this general reorganisation was taking place; but they would have been angry if we had invited the Merchants' Association to be present at negotiations conducted by them, and there was no need for joining them in the negotiations. They were informed, and perhaps they might have been informed earlier, but this was all tentative. The first draft was very rough. I saw it, and after we met the Merchants' Federation we informed the Joint Consultative Council, who did not like the scheme too much. They have not, however, expressed any opposition to the general principle, which is that there must be better organisation. The hon. Lady herself said we did not want the same thing to happen next winter. Last winter was an unfortunate one and the long arm of coincidence might bring, next winter, the same extremities of weather. We want to avoid what happened last winter and the coal trade want to avoid it, too. Those responsible for the distribution of coal have found themselves very much handicapped. They have had their lorries requisitioned and their men have been subject to military service. We of the Mines Department have helped them to retain their men for the purpose of stocking coal. An extension was secured in the case of those to be called up in July, in August there was no calling up, and now there is a further extension for September and October. After October, when, as we assume, there will be large quantities of house coal in stock, we shall want to make sure that the organisation for delivery is capable of achieving its task.

Miss Ward

May I ask a straight question? It is the fact, is it not, that the scheme which is being negotiated with various interests concerned is not in detail the same scheme as was originally proposed by the distributors?

Mr. Grenfell

Certainly not. There have been negotiations—

Miss Ward

That is all I wanted to know.

Mr. Grenfell

—and negotiations always result in amendments and in compromise. There has been an interchange of opinion, and there have been amendments, and I believe the scheme will accomplish what needs to be done. Let me give an example of what has been done in my own part of the country. In the case of men who have had to leave their businesses, being unable to get further postponement of military service, their businesses are being taken over by their neighbours. Their registered customers are transferred to the lists of other distributors, who will carry on the distribution, carry on the "round" of the absent soldier, and when he returns his round will be handed back to him. That is the kind of rationalisation which is being done by agreement. If efficient distribution can be achieved by voluntary means, all well and good; but we in the Mines Department shall take the power to ourselves to see that coal is distributed to those in the country who need it. That is the whole purpose of Part 2 of the agreement, and I need not say anything more. I am sure that when the agreement comes to be promulgated the owners, the coal merchants and the public will feel that they have benefited from the agreement finally reached.

Next I would say a word about the pits themselves. We should remember that 750,000 men still work in the pits, and that about 600,000 of them work underground, under conditions always of great danger and great discomfort. I am very much concerned to see that we maintain the system of inspection and supervision. I have to report that we shall be appointing more inspectors to see that the work of inspection does not suffer, and an agreement to carry out workmen's inspections has been approved by the Department since the war began. There are measures of supervision which I think will result in benefit. I am very much con- cerned to make sure that the essential conditions for safety shall not suffer. The price of safety is eternal vigilance, in the mines more than anywhere else. One of the essential conditions is that there shall be a system of ventilation which not only satisfies the tests of measurements but is adequate to dilute any gas and thus remove danger. I have had reports of two explosions since I entered office, and I am disturbed at those reports. They have been printed, but we shall not discuss them until they have been circulated. We are not quite happy over the reports upon those explosions. I will say no more than that now.

Then there is another aspect of safety with which I am concerned. We have had an increase in the number of multiple accidents, of falls of roof and sides, in which more than one man is killed. It has been suggested in some quarters that the immature timber grown at home which is now being supplied is not as suitable as the timber we formerly obtained from abroad. We have a sufficient supply of timber, I am glad to say, but we are using fairly substantial quantities of home-grown timber, necessarily, and we shall have to keep a close watch to see that the safety of the men is not impaired by the use of this timber.

On the subject of research, we are concentrating our efforts upon many aspects of it. There are new conditions of mining, there are new facts to be investigated. For some time we have been pursuing investigations into silicosis, nystagmus and other diseases, and I am happy to say that after a long inquiry we expect shortly to receive a report on the subject. My hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) has been a party to that inquiry and knows about it in far greater detail than I do. I hope that we shall derive much benefit from the investigation into these very elusive, difficult and insidious evils in the mining life of this country.

I would say one final word in praise of my own Department. Lord Portal, who came there to do important work, has gone to join some other Department. I have worked happily with him and with the other officials of the Department—and I hope we have worked efficiently. My last word of tribute is to the men of all ranks in the industry. They are performing a job of work under conditions which have been made much more difficult by the circumstances of the war. The miners in Kent, and the miners in areas elsewhere which have been attacked day and night, like Durham and South Wales, are living up to the traditions of a bold people, honest and hard working at all times, and we ought to be proud of the way in which they have responded to the country's need.

Mr. S. O. Davies

Can the Minister say what his Department is doing with a view to getting coal used as an alternative fuel for road transport?

Mr. Grenfell

My hon. Friend knows that it is a question of suitable fuel, and knows also that it is a question of obtaining sufficient steel to make the producers. In reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. Ellis Smith) about two months ago, on the question of producer-gas lorries, I said that we regarded 2,000 motor lorries as being the limit for which we could get the materials. I think we can now put the figure higher than that. Lord Ridley's Committee has made a most valuable report on the subject. It is worthy of special attention, worthy of a Debate by itself in the House, and I am hopeful that we shall get good results from it and that a far greater number of these vehicles may be seen on the roads.

6.37 p.m.

Mr. James Griffiths (Llanelly)

I wish to join with my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) in paying a tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. D. Grenfell) upon his appointment to this Department, and upon the way in which he has approached what has become an extraordinarily difficult task. I do not suppose there is another Department which has found its task so completely changed over in so short a time as the Department of the Secretary for Mines. When he came to his post on the formation of the new Government he was confronted with an entirely different problem from the one which now faces him. It was not only the problem of mobilising the resources of the country for our continuously-expanding industry; he had also to budget for supplies of coal for those who at that time were our Allies and those whom we had counted upon to be our Allies to the end of the war. Then all the transformation in Europe took place. That has had its repercussion upon almost every phase of our lives, and is a con- sideration to be taken into account in almost all decisions the Government have to make. All Europe is now—and we hope it is going to be a short now—under the domination of the Nazis, and among other consequences of that fact is the position in which the coal trade now finds itself. An hon. Friend here put the position in very simple figures, and I will repeat them. What the change means is that whereas last June, before the collapse of France, before the change in Europe, we had to budget for an additional export of 21,000,000 tons of coal to the Continent of Europe, that coal cannot now go there and that has changed the outlook in many coalfields.

I shall make only a short speech this evening, because I know that the House wants to get home in present circumstances, but I should like to make two or three suggestions. First, I would urge upon my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines not to allow himself to be rushed into making quick decisions to contract this industry at this time. An hon. Member has put the position thus: Markets have been lost, 2,000,000 tons less of coal per month which we had budgeted for to go to Europe is not needed now, collieries are closing down, there is short time working, the miners are idle. There is the kind of suggestion that at once something ought to be done to contract the industry, to bring it down to the level of the markets which are available at this moment. For several reasons I hope we shall be very careful before taking any action on those lines. The Minister has spoken of the personnel of the mining industry. It is a trained personnel, a skilled personnel, and it is in the best interests of the country to keep that personnel in the industry as long as possible. In many ways I would urge that, taking the long view, it would perhaps pay the State better to keep the miners idle, paying them full wages, and have them available at the end of three months, than to let them drift into another industry from which we could not get them back.

I say that for two reasons. One of them I do not elaborate in any great detail, because we do not want to speak about it in great detail. No one in this House would like to give a guarantee that the whole of the British coalfield will be available for work during the whole of this conflict. No one would care to give that undertaking. We have to take into account the possibilities of the fortunes, or the misfortunes, of war. In saying that we are not talking defeatism, but facing the position; and if invasion comes we know that we are going to beat it back and not only beat it back but fight on to carry the war elsewhere. But if by the accident of war a part of the British coalfield is cut off, is it not desirable that we shall have in reserve other parts of the coalfield to take the place immediately of the part which is lost? For that first reason I want to urge my hon. Friend, though I do not think any urging is necessary, that there would be very great danger indeed in closing down too much of the mining industry and losing the personnel.

Further, there is a danger in losing not only the personnel but the pits. Here I would urge this consideration upon my hon. Friend. The mines are still privately owned, but in these days private interest must give place to public need, or we shall lose the war. The public need must come first. Many of the owners are facing this problem—let me say it without being controversial—in the traditional private-ownership way. If the demand for the coal is cut down by 10 per cent. they look around for the pit which they think it is best for them to close. Let us suppose that South Wales is faced with the problem of contracting the industry by 10 per cent. There are two ways in which that can be done. One way may be the best for the owners but may be the worst for the nation. One way would be to close 10 per cent. of the pits. The other way is to spread that 10 per cent. reduction over all the pits, keeping them all in production.

My hon. Friend knows very well, and no one better than he, with his wide experience and technical knowledge of the industry, that closing a pit and re-opening it shortly afterwards is very unwise. He knows that it may take three months after the re-opening of the pit to get it ready for production. It is essential, at a time like this, that the personnel should be kept intact and the pits kept open. I urge my hon. Friend to keep this matter in mind. He knows that there is an aspect of it which closely concerns my own constituency and a part of the coal- field with which I have been familiar for almost all my life. A number of pits are threatened with closing, and, whether that may or may not be in the interests of the private owners, I say that it is not in the national interest that the pits should be closed now. I urge that the problem shall be considered in the way I suggest. As far as possible, keep the personnel, because it may be required later, and may be vitally necessary for this nation in its great effort.

I am well aware of all the difficulties which were mentioned by my hon. Friend the Minister, and particularly about coal being required for certain processes. I know that in recent years there has been a large growth in the selling of coal by calorific value and chemical composition. People come to the industry and say that they want coal which has a certain analysis. By mixing coals together, new qualities have been created. I therefore urge that this also should be taken into account. I do not regard the problem of the differences in quality between different kinds of coal as presenting insuperable difficulties. As a matter of fact, I believe that, in many ways, the young technicians who are coming into the industry are those to whom the industry must look for its future. If they were given a pool, consisting of all the coal in the country, so that they might combine coals to obtain qualities which are desired, it would be very good for the industry and, in the long run, for the nation. I therefore urge my hon. Friend not to accept too readily the arguments against the sharing of markets, and to look further at the question.

I have previously pointed out in this House that the export districts of the mining industry have for some time been in a terrible plight. They have had to carry the burden of the after-war settlement of Europe, and of the slumps of 1921–22 and 1931. They have also carried the burden of the export trade. Now they have to carry the new burden of the misfortunes of war. We are entitled to say to the Government and to the nation that the men concerned ought not to be allowed to suffer and to carry burdens for which they are not responsible. I hope that the Government will look at every possible avenue and endeavour to lift this burden from the export trade. They should share the trade with the districts, and work out some scheme by which the inland markets are brought in to assist the exporting districts so that the burdens may be evened out and not again fall entirely upon Durham and South Wales, which are the two main exporting districts.

The best solution would be to find other markets, in which case my hon. Friend would then be faced with the problem we had last June of attracting men back into the industry and arranging for transport. I am not suggesting that the problem is easy, or that it is possible to find outside Europe new markets for all the 21,000,000 tons of coal that we had budgeted to send to Europe, but I urge that there are markets outside Europe. I am not satisfied that every effort that could be made is being made to exploit those new markets. I note from the trade columns of a South Wales paper that a United States trade commission, associated with their Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, has issued a statement showing the total export of coal from the United States to certain countries, including Canada, Central America, South America, Europe and other destinations. The totals were given, for example, for January and May of 1939, and for the corresponding months of 1940. The figure for January, 1939, showed that the United States exported about 2,734,000 tons of coal. In the corresponding period, this year, the exports had risen to 6,200,000. In other words, the American exports of coal nearly trebled between January, 1939, and January, 1940. It is obvious that America is getting the bulk of the export trade that is available.

I am not suggesting, at this stage and in these circumstances, especially after the speech to which we listened to-day and the agreement that has just been signed with America, that we can enter into a controversy with that country on matters of the kind to which I refer, but I would like to make a suggestion. If we can come to an agreement for the exchange of destroyers for bases, is it not possible for us to open conversations in order to find a way in which America and ourselves can share the South American market for coal?

Mr. Gallecher (West Fife)

That is a different story.

Mr. Griffiths

It may be a different story, but I see no reason why it should not be possible, and I hope that my suggestion may be carried out. I am told that the Ministry of Shipping are not too helpful to the coal export trade just now. I know that the Ministry have their difficulties and problems, but the problems of coal export are very important. No one who listened to the Budget Debates and who has seen the trade returns of our exports will need to be reminded that, in the last couple of months, our export trade has declined by 30 per cent. That is important to a nation such as our own, which has depended for much of its economic life upon the export trade and which has to buy so much of its food and raw materials from every corner of the world. We must either pay for these things by our exports or in very much worse ways, and it is essential that every Department should use the best efforts to help the coal export districts.

I do not think that these problems can be left entirely to the export districts themselves or to the industry. The Government must take a hand in the matter. I hope that the Government realise thoroughly that, in doing so, they would not only be helping the industry and the men concerned, but would be doing a great service to this nation, in recovering the export trade upon which our national solvency depends. I hope that the few suggestions I have made will be considered by my hon. Friend. I do not want to see this industry thrown out now. He knows the important part which it may have to play again very shortly, both in the internal economy of this country and in its export markets. Are we to assume that Europe will for all time remain as it is at the present stage of this conflict? Suppose that we one day release France, as I have no doubt we shall, from the grip of Hitler; it means that France will be a coal market once again. When Europe has once again become free, we can supply Europe with the coal it wants. For all these reasons I want to keep the industry as intact as possible, both in personnel and pits, because I want it to be able to take full advantage of opportunities when they come. In the meantime, I urge the Government that they owe it to the men in the industry to see that burdens are equally shared among all in the industry.

I want to say just a word about the problem of accidents, to which a reference was made by the Minister. I know how hard he has worked upon that problem. There are many aspects of the problem, associated with many parts of this country, that are very disturbing, and the present position leaves much to be desired in the way of safety. We shall look with great confidence indeed to my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines for some real and practical contributions towards a solution of the problem. I thank him for the information that the report upon silicosis will be available very shortly. I hope it will be possible for us to arrange to discuss these matters before long. We know that the men in the pits are doing their best under difficulties. The men in my district of South Wales went to the pits this morning at six o'clock, after an air-raid warning which had lasted from 9.30 last night to 4.51 this morning. I know some people may say: "Why don't they sleep?" but if a father has in the house little children for whom he is responsible, he believes it is his duty to remain alert during an air-raid, in case of danger. I am concerned about the effect of these things upon the accident rate, because, in such circumstances, men in the pit expose themselves to much more danger.

I look forward to discussing these problems on another occasion, but today's Debate will have been very useful in concentrating the attention of the House and of the country upon the immediate problems of the industry. The point which I end by making is that, in these difficult times, it is essential that the mining industry shall be kept as intact as possible, because the time will very soon come when it will have a very important part to play.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. Gallacher (Fife, West)

The Minister for Mines paid a high tribute to the miners of this country for their courage, endurance and loyalty, but I am afraid that that tribute will fall with a hollow sound upon the ears of some of the miners and their wives, because the Minister did not draw attention to the fact that those qualities applied to the most dangerous occupation in the country, and the miners are actually the poorest paid workers in the country. The hon. Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) rightly said that these men should be retained in this industry, which is the basic industry of this country, and without which there could be no other industry and no prosperity for any section of the community. Springing up in various parts of the country are different kinds of Government undertakings in which all kinds of work are subcontracted out to various contractors. These contractors are employing additional men. They are paying them not only for their ordinary day-time work but overtime. Attention has been drawn in this House to the fact that many men working in Government employment are making good wages, but those who draw attention to this fact do not mention overtime which goes to make up the wages. The Minister for Mines will understand that it is easier to do 80 hours on a surface job, such as is associated with some of this contracting work, than to do 40 hours' work underground.

Mr. Grenfell

The hon. Gentleman was not present when this point was referred to in passing. We were not discussing the comparative wages paid. I said that it was still better for men engaged in the mining industry, not only on short time but on ordinary time, to leave if they wished and to go to a better paid job.

Mr. Gallacher

I am sorry if I missed some of the Minister's speech in consequence of the schedule being interrupted to-day and because some of my engagements took up extra time. That which the hon. Member for Llanelly fears is actually taking place, because some of the most active young lads are moving away into other jobs which can only be considered as temporary employment. They may be a month, two months or more in those jobs, but actually it is temporary employment, and it is taking them away from this important industry. One of the first problems in connection with the mining industry is to ensure an adequate livelihood for the miner, his wife and his children.

Mr. Grenfell

And better conditions.

Mr. Gallacher

And better conditions. This brings me to the question of the reports in connection with explosions. We are not discussing this question to-day, but in passing I would like to say something in connection with it. I feel that one side of the mining industry where there must be a rapid extension and change is in connection with workmen's inspectors. It is not possible to continue with the system of workmen's inspectors being maintained by collections at the pits or by the voluntary efforts of the trade unions, as has been the case up to now. It is essential that the present democratic electoral method of appointing workmen's inspectors should continue, but the Government should give them far greater powers, and they should receive payment from Government sources. I mention this point in passing because I hope that later on there will be a discussion on these reports. As the hon. Member for Llanelly says, every report makes disturbing reading, and one is always faced with the fact that if one method or another had been adopted, the explosions and the terrible calamities arising could have been averted. Therefore, it will be necessary to have such a discussion.

The hon. Member for Llanelly drew attention to the fact that there has been a big jump, to the extent of almost three times the amount, in the export of coal from America to the other countries in the American continent during the past year. It would be very nice if it was possible for the export industry in this country to obtain a better footing over there, but I have a feeling, now that America has secured an important strategical position in the North Atlantic and the West Indies, that we shall see this process of the great increase in American coal exports going up, not down. One step that we should take in the export business is to take measures to ensure that everybody in this country has an abundance of coal this winter. It would be a good thing if we could see to it that the poorest of families are supplied with an abundance of anthracite coal. Of course, it would be difficult to start it going, but once it gets going, it gives a better fire and a better heat.

Mr. J. Griffiths

And no smoke.

Mr. Gallacher

And no smoke. Arising out of the various factors mentioned by the hon. Member for Llanelly, we are now in a situation in which there is a tendency towards a slump in the mining industry. But there is a sufficient market in this country if everybody could get the amount of coal he required during the coming winter. There is a sufficient market in this country, not from the point of view of people being able to pay for the coal but from the point of view of people being able to use it, to compensate for the loss of markets as a result of events which have taken place on the other side of the continent. There should be no question of taking from the coal industry these men whom the Minister has eulogised. Every effort should be made to ensure that every available ounce of coal is burned this winter by the people in this country, thereby ensuring that the men are kept in employment.

Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Nine Minutes after Seven o'Clock until Tuesday, 17th September, pursuant to the Resolution of the House this day.