HC Deb 18 October 1944 vol 403 cc2476-506

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Pym.]

4.31 p.m.

Mr. Tinker (Leigh)

I wish to take this opportunity of raising a matter which relates to a Question I had on the Order Paper last July. It is the question of recruitment into the mines. I asked the Minister of Fuel and Power: if he is aware that there is a falling off of boys from mining families going into the mines; and will he take steps to get the views of parents as to the cause of this so that remedies can be found to meet it."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 25th July, 1944; Vol. 402, c. 579.] The Minister replied that they were examining the matter, and were doing what they could; but I felt that that was not sufficient, because this was a matter on which the country ought to be aware of what was actually happening. We are constantly being told that there is a falling off in coal supplies, and I do not think anybody has got to the real reason. My belief is that it is due to there being insufficient man-power in the mines. This matter has to be dealt with if the coal is to be produced. The two main points I wish to deal with are the wastage in manpower in the mines, and the inflow of recruits to replace that wastage.

I would like to refer to the Statistical Digest issued by the Ministry of Fuel and Power. This is perhaps one of the most important documents that we have ever had about the mining industry. Everybody welcomes it, because it gives a real insight into what is happening. That digest covers two complete years. It shows that the number of deaths, whether accidental or natural, in the industry in that period was 6,667. The number of men who retired from gainful work was 5,723. Here is another sad commentary on the mining industry: the number of men injured, over and above the number already on the colliery books, in those two years was 43,705. The number of men going out of the industry for other causes, which cannot be specifically given, was over 15,000. The wastage in the industry amounted to 71,414. That is a tremendous figure for two years. How are we to meet that wastage? Juvenile recruitment, which is supposed to be the only channel to replace the loss, amounted to 24,768. That leaves a deficiency of 46,646. It will be seen what a tremendous number has to be replaced. Parliament has recognised this. According to the digest, abnormal recruitment, including men returning from His Majesty's Forces or from other industries, volunteers, optants, and ballotees, have brought into the mines 49,957. With all this abnormal entry into the mines, we still have a deficiency in the two years of 689 people, which will result in a serious state of affairs unless we can somehow meet it.

When the war ends a number of men now in the Forces will naturally turn to the mines, but they will be men well on in life, aged 30 or over, who cannot last very long. For a time we shall have the mining industry built up by these men returning from the Forces. I want to put the position of the Bevin boys—the official term for them is ballotees, but everybody knows them as the Bevin boys. According to the figures I got yesterday, 24,400 of them are working underground. I have interviewed many of these ballotees, to find out whether they are likely to stay in the pit. Not one of those I have talked to says that he is going to stay. They all say that as soon as they are free they are going to follow some other occupation. I prophesy that not more than two per cent. of the Bevin boys will remain in the mines when they are free to go. So we shall get only about 500 remaining in the mines, out of the figures I have mentioned. Where are the men to come from to carry on the mining industry?

There are remarkable statistics in this Digest. They show that in 1940 29,600 boys under 16 entered the mines, and that in 1943 the corresponding number was 18,200. In those three years there was a falling off of 11,400, or 39 per cent. These boys are from mining families. We have to ask ourselves why they are not going into the mines now. The mining industry was good enough for the fathers: why is it not good enough for the sons? I can tell that from personal experience. Parents who have experienced conditions in the mines, the accidents that happen, the hardships that have to be undergone, say, "If my lad can get a job anywhere else he is not going into the pit." Ask the parents in any mining village why their lads have not gone to the pit. Without any hesitation they will say, "Unless I am driven by economic necessity, I shall not let my lad go into the pit." That is not found merely in Yorkshire or in Lancashire: you will find it wherever you go. Many of the miners' leaders are trade union officials or Members of Parliament, or have some other corresponding position. There may be an exception here and there in the case of someone who has a particular job, but otherwise no one wants his lad to go into the pit if he can get some other job. Though such men have represented the miners and been fighting for them, their lads are not going into the pit because they know the dangers and the physical conditions.

I have tried to find out myself what is the reason, by going round and asking people, and one of the men to whom I spoke, a man who is chairman of the district council, who has three sons and is a working miner, told me that none of his sons worked in the pit. When the youngest one became of military age, the father told me that he had said to his son "You will have to go in the Army or into the pit; are you going in the pit?" The son had replied "I am not going into the pit after what I have seen you undergo. I am prepared to go into the Army if I get the chance." That is taking place in the mining industry all the way through. Last night, I met a friend of mine who used to serve on the Wages Board in Manchester, whom I had not met for many years. He reminded me of the time when he was in Manchester, when he worked in a big colliery, and he told me that not one of his contemporaries who worked alongside him in the pit had their sons working in the pit. This is from North Staffordshire, and it is an indication of what is happening all over.

That is the position wherever you go. The young lads are not going into the collieries, and, unless something is done, inevitably, the coal industry will come to a standstill. It is no use us saying we want coal and that coal is necessary for the nation, unless we do something to make it worth while for these lads to go into the pit. I do not want hon. Members to think that, because their fathers have been miners, there is going to be a natural flow into the mines from these families. It has stopped and the nation has to find out what can be done about it. Unless we can make the mining industry attractive enough to get these lads into the pits, the whole thing will stop of itself.

Therefore, I felt it my duty, combined with a desire to make conditions for miners better, to let the nation know what is happening and to draw attention to this matter and bring figures. There is the in escapable fact of what is happening, and it is now up to Parliament and the country to devise some means by which this situation can be rectified. Yesterday, I listened to the hon. Member for Anglesey (Miss Lloyd George), who asked for a long-term policy for the Welsh coal industry and said that coat was one of the important factors in Wales. The hon. Lady did not realise that, unless we can get the miners to produce the coal, then the whole thing comes to a deadlock. Yesterday, also, I had a question to the Minister of Fuel and Power as to whether there are any other means of getting coal, and, particularly, about the Russian method of extracting the power from coal without going below ground to get it. This is not mature yet, and, until it does come about, we shall require to get the coal by present methods. How are we going to get it? It will have to be by way of an inducement to these young men to take up mining, and that is the serious problem to be solved.

The reason why young men are not going into the mines is that they cannot see any hope for the future there. Neither can I, and if I had my chance again, after what I have gone through, I should think twice before I went into the mines. I am suggesting certain methods by which this problem ought to be tackled. First of all, I suggest a comprehensive committee of leading men and women to examine this question thoroughly and exhaustively by going to the mining communities and talking to the parents and asking them why their lads are not going into the pit. They should find out what is behind it all and try to get to the bottom of it. I am satisfied that if they do go, and get to know what is happening, they will realise at once that something must be done to remedy this situation.

When all that has been done, I suggest that whatever safety methods are required, regardless of expense, ought to be put into operation. Many times we have known that the safety of the miners could have been secured if it had not been for questions of profit. Every piece worker knows that, when there is gas in the mine, it is a deadly thing, and that when it gets to two and a half per cent. there is danger looming ahead. He also knows that, many times, it has been ignored because the fireman has not reported it because it would have meant losing his job. Many times, not only when the question of gas was involved, but when other safety methods should have been effected, this question of profit came up. I suggest that, whatever safety methods are necessary for the welfare of the mine workers, they ought to be put into use regardless of the cost, because the price we pay in death and accident is enormous, and that constitutes one of the reasons why there is not a lot of young lads going into the pits to-day. Every day, the mother is thinking whether her lad will return safe and sound or come back maimed, and, in every colliery village you will find dwarfed limbs as a result of men having had legs broken, which have not completely set or recovered. These things have to be removed if we are to get more workers.

The second thing which I suggest is that we have to make conditions in the mines comparable with those in other occupations. We cannot overcome the drabness and the hardship of the mines, and their danger to the men, but we can compensate them in other ways. I would say that we should offer them a much shorter working day and a shorter working week, to equalise them with those in other industries. We should say to the young miner, "We know it is very hard for you, and, therefore, to compensate you, we will give you a shorter working week."

Sir Granville Gibson (Pudsey and Otley)

Will my hon. Friend give the House information as to what hours are worked, because he has referred to hours comparable with other industries?

Mr. Tinker

They are working seven and a half hours now, but that is not all. Everybody conversant with the shift system knows that they cannot all go into the mine at once, as in a factory. The average man does seven and a half hours a day, but for the extreme man, who goes down first and comes up last, it is eight and a half hours a day.

It is not just the length of time it takes but the hardships they have to undergo in getting to and from their work. There are long underground roads, sometimes a mile in length. I saw in the paper that yesterday the Duchess of Kent went down a mine a mile underground. I thought, though I did not want anything to happen to the lady, that the best thing would have been to let her walk to the far end. I believe she was conveyed to the face. When people go down the pit they should not have everything prepared for them but should go as the ordinary miner goes and then they would realise what he has to go through. These things have to be examined if we are to get young miners to go down the pit. We have done very well at the present time in regard to pay. We have risen from the 81st position to the 21st position with regard to rates of pay, but I shall not be satisfied until the miner is No. 1. He ought to be in that position and unless he is we shall not get sufficient miners.

Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster (Fylde)

Does the hon. Member really contend that the figure of 21 has any relation to the present position? He must know that the miners passed it a long time ago and that the industry is either second or third on the whole list of wage earners.

Mr. Tinker

The figure was used by my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. Grenfell) in a previous Debate, and I do not dispute the figure of the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I am only too glad to accept it. There is no doubt that the position has got much better. In "The Times" to-day Robert Foot, Chairman of the Mining Association of Great Britain, has been surveying the mining field. He says: As part of its plans for such an approach to the solution of the problems of the industry, both old and new, the Mining Association invited me to become its chairman and survey the whole position. Having completed that survey, I am now engaged, again at the invitation of the Mining Association, in the preparation of proposals, and any plan which I may submit will include stability and a good standard of life for labour in exchange for good work; security and an adequate reward for capital in return for enterprise and efficiency; and, consistently with these essential conditions, fair treatment for the consumer and close regard to his requirements as regards supplies, price, and service. It is very nice to write like that, but I hope that he will see that those who give their labour in the mine shall receive an adequate return for what they do. If he is going to get profits for private enterprise, make the conditions of mining what they ought to be, and give the consumers cheap coal—

Sir G. Gibson

I can assure the hon. Member that to-day I am paying 44s. per ton for coal for which I paid 12s. 11d. at the beginning of the last war.

Mr. Tinker

I would say that before we talk about cheap coal, we should take away profits of mine owners, and if they cannot make profit we should tell them to get out of it. Whether it means cheap coal or not, the first essential is for the men working in the mines to have a decent standard of life, and the public will have to pay for it.

Sir G. Gibson

They are paying for it.

Mr. Tinker

If coal supply becomes shorter, we shall be begging of the men to go into the mines, and I have heard it said that if it gets to be £1 an ounce some of them will not go down the pit to get it, and I believe that. The essential thing to do in order to get workers into the mine is to give them conditions equal to those obtained in other industries. We shall have to weigh up the dangers and hardships and try to compensate them. Unless we do, the nation will be faced with a crisis. I hope and trust that while the war is on we shall get supplies of coal, as we must concentrate on winning the war. When the war is over if fair conditions are not given to the miner and he is not made worthy of his hire I shall not mind what happens. I shall fight for all I am worth to try to get conditions for him equal to those in other industries. I hope that Parliament will realise what is happening in the mining industry. It is no use crying out for More coal unless we are prepared to give a decent standard of life to the men who get the coal. Do not expect the miners to send their children there otherwise. It will be the fault of Parliament for not having dealt with it properly.

4.56 p.m.

Mr. Tom Brown (Ince)

The question before the House can be summed up under one heading. Can this House with the assistance of the coal owners make the mining industry sufficiently attractive? It is a very serious matter and is worth more consideration than is indicated by cheap interjections about paying for the coal which the miner uses. I want to support the contention put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker). When debates or discussions on the mining, industry are introduced we on these benches are accused of not being sufficiently interested in the industry we represent. No man can accuse mining Members of not being interested in the industry which they represent. One of the mistakes made in our consideration of mining matters is the fact that there are so many people on the opposite side—and I say this with respect—who do not take any notice of the advice given to them from these benches.

I want to go further back than my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh, because I hold the opinion very strongly that the rot in the mining industry set in, not in 1938 or 1930, but as far back as 1922. Despite all the pleadings from these benches and in the country, even to Cabinet Ministers, we could not get the authorities to see eye to eye with us, and the mining industry slid down the slippery slope, from which it has not recovered since, and particularly so in regard to juvenile labour. It is very interesting to note—and here I want to pay a compliment to the Mines Department for the Statistical Digest from which these figures have been extracted—that in 1920 there were 533,605 boys under the age of 16 employed in the mines of this country. I would remind the House that it was from 1920 to 1922 that wage rates went down in the mining industry, and in 1938 the number of boys had fallen to 27,600. In 1943 boys under the age of 16 employed in the mining industry numbered only 18,200.

I want to refer to another aspect. I have been examining some figures regarding the entrants for technical work in the mines. Fortunately or unfortunately I have been for a long number of years a governor of one of the leading mining colleges in the North of England, the Wigan Mining and Technical College, which is of world-wide renown from a technical point of view. I find that the enrolments in 1920–1921 for full time were 91, and for other time—that is part-time, Saturday morning and evening—623. That was at a time when there were large numbers of young men working in the mining industry. To-day I find that the entrants for full-time technical education in mining subjects have fallen from 91 in 1920–21 to 4 last year. The total number of enrolments at that college in 1920–1921 was 623 and this year they have fallen to 214. It is significant to note that the fall in the figures of boys and young men employed in the mines has also resulted in a falling of the figures for technical education.

There is an important point with regard to the mechanical side of mining which must be borne in mind. So long as the Mines Department keeps before them as their first essential the safety of the men, I do not care how much machinery they introduce, because every time it reduces the manual labour of the men in the pits. From the statistical digest I find that out of the 25 districts into which the country is split there are six districts where over go per cent. of the pits are producing coal cut by machine. There are five districts out of the 25 where over 90 per cent. of the pits are producing coal conveyed by mechanical conveyors. There are 12 districts where over 60 per cent. of the pits are producing coal cut by machinery. There are nine districts where 60 per cent. of the pits are producing coal conveyed by mechanical conveyors. On an average 67 per cent. of the coal produced in England and Wales is cut by coal-cutting machines. In Scotland it has reached the high figure of 82 per cent. Sixty-seven per cent. of the coal produced in England and Wales is by mechanical conveyors and 66 per cent. of the coal produced in Scotland is by mechanical conveyors.

Therefore I come to this point, that what we have to do in order to ensure the production of coal in the future is to have more technicians and more engineers in addition to more manual workers at the coal face. There are three grades upon which we have to concentrate. First it is essential to have more coal-face workers; secondly, it is essential that we have highly qualified technicians and highly qualified engineers. How are we to get them? Are there any in this House or outside, whether they be engineers at the pit or in the munition factories, who can say that the engineering skill of our men has been rewarded by the wages they have been paid? The highly qualified engineer has never been paid the amount of money to which he has been entitled. The old idea of "like father like son" has now gone by the board and we have to do something, if this industry of ours is to maintain the position it occupied many years ago, to make it attractive. To cut out the drabness, to cut out the darkness is an impossibility, but I do say with all seriousness that a lot can be done to ease the burdens of those who are working in the pits, and particularly the young life.

Let us examine for a moment the change in the working conditions underground which has been brought about by intensified mechanisation. When I worked in the pit as a lasher-on in my early days, I was responsible for the supply of tubs for four men. It was a comparatively easy job but now, in highly intensified mechanised mines, the lasher-on is responsible for the supply of tubs for 100 or 200 men. Whereas he used to handle perhaps 40 or 50 and up to 100 boxes, in many pits to-day he is handling between 400 and 600 tubs per day. Another change is that the boxes used now are a tremendous weight, and as a result of the change from 7 cwt. to 15 cwt. and 21 cwt. young men of 16 to 18 have great difficulty in handling them.

All these factors will have to be taken into consideration if we are to attract young men to the mining industry. How are we going to do it? A lot has been said about wages. Be it remembered that the Porter award, which gave concessions to a lot of our men, did not give any concessions to those for whom we intended it. First we have to apply our minds to the wages of the young men we want to get into the pits, and secondly, to the hours of labour they have to work. Above all, and this transcends everything, we shall have to pay greater regard to the conditions under which our young men have to work in the pits. I welcome the idea of the hon. Member for Leigh that if we are to win back the position we occupied as an industry and get the production of the coal which the nation needs, we shall have to be more serious in our approach to the small matters in the pits. As I have said before in this Chamber, it is not here that coal is produced, it is at the pits, and it is to the pits that we want to attract the men.

Another point is that at present mine managers, who have been appointed by Statute, have not the scope that they had hitherto. In bygone days they knew every one of their workpeople, and their workpeople knew them. One of the most successful coal-producing counties is Leicestershire, and one of the reasons is that there are small companies there, as against the large combines and mergers which we have in other parts of the country. I hope the seriousness of the situation in regard to new entrants will command the attention not only of the Minister but of ail those who have the future of this industry at heart.

5.11 p.m.

Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster (Fylde)

I do not propose to take up the time of the House for more than a few minutes, but I think it is appropriate that a few words should be said on this matter from this side. We are grateful to the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) and the hon. Member for Ince (Mr. T. Brown) for having raised this most important subject, on which they have brought to bear a wealth of knowledge and a helpful attitude to the problem which faces the mining industry. But I think that the hon. Member for Leigh let his enthusiasm for his cause run away with him slightly, because some of his figures will not bear too close an examination. Eight months ago we had an Adjournment Debate in this House on the question of Bevin boys and three months ago I had occasion to refer to this matter again on the occasion of the Coal Debate when I stated that the number who had opted to remain in the industry when the war was over was about 40 per cent. Now I have to make a slight variation of that figure, and I will explain why. The figure I gave on that occasion referred to both optants and Bevin boys, and was 40 per cent. in a particular pit which was employing about 400 optants and Bevin boys. I had the figures brought up to date as late as yesterday and they now refer to 500 boys, of whom' rather more are Bevin boys than optants. Of the Bevin boys 22 to 25 per cent. have opted to stay on after the war, and of the optants 50 per cent. have opted to stay on, giving a mean figure of about 37 per cent. I am quite prepared to believe that some of these will not stay on, but I suggest to the House that the figure of one per cent. or two per cent., which has been stated as being the figure for those who will remain in the industry, will not stand looking into.

Mr. George Griffiths (Hemsworth)

Has the hon. and gallant Member interviewed any of these boys? I have run up against scores of them, and they all swear that they will not stop in a pit one hour after the war is over.

Mr. Glanville (Consett)

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that as recently as Monday night I interviewed nearly 400 of these lads, and not a single one was prepared to stay on? They are prepared to do their duty so far as they can during the war, but they will not stay afterwards.

Mr. Tinker

That is what we all find.

Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster

I have interviewed a great number of these boys. I have been underground and seen them at work and followed carefully their scheme of training.

Mr. Glanville

What are they doing?

Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster

I am not going to be drawn aside from my argument. They are undertaking a specific scheme of training in regard to the whole operation of coal mining. Forty per cent. of them are producing coal at a rate consistent with the rate I suggested eight months ago, when this matter was first mooted in the House. What I am saying is that I do not think experience bears out the statement that such a small percentage as was stated by the hon. Member for Leigh will stay on after the war. I think a greater percentage will. But that does not get away from the general proposition that if we are to be satisfied with recruitment to the industry we shall have to do a number of things which will make the industry not only satisfactory to the boys themselves but also to their parents, because parents must be satisfied with what their boys are doing at that stage of their lives. Recruitment to the industry was nearly constant for about seven years before the war. If one refers to the Statistical Digest it will be seen that in 1939 recruitment was slightly better than in 1938. But that is not, possibly, as important as the general proposition that if recruitment after the war is to be satisfactory the conditions of the industry must be such as will induce boys and their parents to look upon mining as a suitable calling. The hon. Member for Leigh and the hon. Member for Ince made certain suggestions which I do not wish to elaborate now, except to say that I do not think that the question of hours per day is as important as the question of a standard week—if possible, a standard five-day week.

Bound up with this is the question of vocational, technical, managerial and educational training, which should receive the immediate and earnest attention of the Government. The Forster Committee has made a comprehensive survey in connection with this matter and this affords me the occasion to advocate that the recommendations of that Committee should be borne out as fully as is con- sistent with opportunity. There is hardly a recommendation made by that Committee which is not wise and sound and which, in the interests of the boys themselves, the industry in general and the nation in particular, should not be enforced at the earliest possible moment.

5.20 p.m.

Mr. Glanville (Consett)

For 41 years I worked in the coal mines. I started at the age of 12. Never in my life did I have the pleasure of working beside any one of the hon. Members who occupy the opposite benches. I am exceedingly interested in their suggestions for solving the problem of recruitment in the mining industry. My hon. Friends have not mentioned that in 1920 Mr. Justice Sankey's Commission recommended a six-hour day for the miners. In 1920 productivity through machine production was not so rich as it is at this moment. Mr. Justice Sankey recommended that, if the then output could be kept up, within 12 months the miners would be able to secure the six-hour day. When I was a boy, and before I was a boy, we were hewing in the Durham coal fields for a six-hour day. When I was a lad we had two shifts. The first went down at four and came up at 11, the other went down from 10 till four o'clock. The pit that I worked in was not mechanised. The hours and conditions of all the men have gradually been worsened. We have a position to-day where every man and boy in the coal mine is working, not seven and a half hours but seven and a half hours plus one winding time. Before hon. Members opposite criticise the conditions under which miners are working I would respectfully ask them to make themselves conversant with the facts, because apparently they are not. I have told my son from his childhood that, if it is possible, he will never go down a mine, I would sooner bury him as a little boy. Hon. Members may smile, but I speak from the bottom of my heart, from a rough school of experience, and not through the academic reading of statistics. I have worked in it, and lived in it, and I know what I am talking about.

We shall never recruit boys into the mining industry so long as the mines are worked for private profit. We speak here glibly of the introduction of machinery, but what happened with the introduction of machinery was the dis- placement of man-power and the flinging on to the roads of hundreds of thousands of miners who were no longer required. We were locked out in 1921 for one reason only, that the Government refused to implement the findings of the Sankey Commission. We in Durham had 9s. 6d. a day bonus and we had the Sankey Award of 2s. a day. You allowed us to take it so long as we were doing the dirty work of winning the war for you but, as soon as we won the war, we were locked out and the work was taken away from us. The same thing happened in 1926. We have had the bitter experience of two lock-outs between the two wars. You talk about recruiting boys for the industry. Why not some of the boys from the other side of the House? If the industry is so attractive, if the wages are so good and the hours so short, with everything in the miner's favour, why is it necessary to exhort miners to breed miners?

We are not standing here continually to produce wealth for you people; why should we? The only way to recruit miners to the industry is to take the mines out of the hands of the coalowners and place them in those of the people. That will guarantee sympathy for every boy who goes underground. They will be guaranteed a decent standard of living and necessary precautions will be taken to ensure their safety. I have known scores of cases where dangerous risks have been taken by the men in the pit. I have seen men buried trying to rescue others who have suffered because of this nasty, competitive piece-work system of so much a tub. That has to be abolished. Everyone who goes underground should be guaranteed that for a day's work he will get a day's wage. He never will get it as long as the pits are privately owned.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Mr. Charles Williams)

I would remind the House that we must not develop the Debate along those lines.

5.30 p.m.

Mr. Sloan (Ayrshire, South)

My hon. Friend the Member for Consett (Mr. Glanville) said that he was speaking from the heart. Our poet Robert Burns says: The heart's aye the pairt that mak's us richt or wrang. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend was speaking sincerely and from the bottom of his heart. I wonder why we always find that this great basic industry presents such a baffling problem. Many people have tried to solve it, and the industry still appears to be in the doldrums. This discussion has ranged largely round the question of the recruitment of labour to the mines. That is a baffling problem in itself, and it will baffle any Minister who attempts to solve it. The fact remains, however we may attempt to clothe it in statistics, that the entry of youths into the mining industry has decreased from 25,000 to 10,000 or 12,000. The reasons are simple. There is, first, the reluctance of youths to go into such a dangerous occupation; and, second, there is the reason, stated by my hon. Friend the Member for Consett, namely, the desire of parents to direct their children to some occupation not as dangerous and disagreeable as mining.

We have tried to staff the pits by compulsion. That has failed, and I am not surprised, and nor is any hon. Member who has experience of mining districts. Coalowners have never done reminding us that we cannot improve production by increasing wages. I am not inclined to disagree with them, because to improve wages alone will never bring increased production. It is true that when wages are higher absenteeism increases. Nobody denies that. The coalowners tried to solve the question of production in the period mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Consett, when they said, "Take off the control and let us deal with the matter in our own way, and we will increase production." They reduced wages by 9s. 6d. to 12S. 6d. a day, which meant that, if the miner and his family were to live at all, he had to work every hour it was possible to get to the mines. That is one way of increasing production. It is one way, however, of destroying the mining industry.

Something much more fundamental is required if we are to staff the mines and get people who are prepared to do the work. Something more than just throwing a handful of corn to the horse at the end of the day is necessary. Some of the young men who have been brought into the mining industry are causing great concern in the minefields. I attended a meeting on Friday where the question of these youths was under consideration. Although there were both coalowners and miners' representatives present, and the regional controller and his people were there, we did not hear any such statement as that made by the hon. Gentleman opposite, that 30, 40 or 50 per cent. of the Bevin boys had indicated their intention of staying. As a matter of fact, it is difficult to get them to work at all. Discipline has become deplorable These lads know that they have been directed to the mines, and there is practically no method of having any control over them. They will never produce coal. When the scheme was put into operation we stated here that it was bound to fail.

One cannot expect to get coal production by directing lads of this kind to the mines. All that it is doing is to load the man-power at the collieries, and that is reflecting itself in the figures of output per man-shift. The more men there are on the colliery books, the more the output per man-shift is reduced if there is not a corresponding increase of coal output. Absenteeism and a lot of other things are blamed for the reduction, whereas it is due to the overloading of the man-power at the collieries. These youths who have been directed into the mining districts are neither blind nor deaf. They can see the conditions under which men are expected to do their jobs, and they listen to the history of mining life. They have been transplanted into the most bleak districts in the country, and they cannot help comparing the desolate towns and villages of the mining districts with the towns and villages they have left. Then, too, the houses and the social surroundings are very different from what they are used to. They hear and see that, although the miner produces the most valuable commodity, on which our very industrial life depends, he still remains the poorest of men.

It is a remarkable fact which is worth examining that, although coal has created many rich men and millionaires, it has never in the history of the industry brought prosperity to the people in the minefields. There is not a single case where it has brought prosperity to an area. It has made fortunes for certain individuals, but for the people engaged in the industry it has brought nothing but poverty and misery. They see the miner's life always in jeopardy. They see men being brought out from the pit either dead or injured. It is not something to which they can look forward with any relish. They see that death and disease are always round the corner. They see miners afflicted with nystagmus, silicosis, pneumoconiosis or industrial dermatitis, crippled by rheumatism or sciatica, or twisted and doubled up. Does anyone think that such sights will induce these fresh young men to join this great industry that is bound up with our prosperity?

I cannot for the life of me understand why the Minister of Labour, the Minister of Fuel and Power, or any of this fanciful set of people in this country imagine that they can solve the mining industry and increase production by such a method, which is creating more difficulty than ever. We hope that something will be done. It is not my problem to do it. It is the problem of the Minister. I get nothing out of it and my workmen get nothing out of it. They will get their wages from week to week while there is employment, but it is something that ought to be settled, on some policy whereby the arduous nature of the industry can be relieved a bit.

We have heard a lot about the new mining machinery and we have been waiting for the American report. We understand that there are disclosures and suggestions and that the committee of experts have placed on paper their opinion as to how output could be improved. All that was months ago, yet hon. Members who discuss mining problems in this House are still in ignorance of what the report contains. Something should be done to let us know what is in it. I hope that coal output will be increased although, as I say, it is not my business; but if the industry of the country is to be maintained after the war and we are to have this valuable product for export, it will be necessary to secure it and it is high time that some forward policy were taken to ensure that we shall have increased coal production.

5.44 P.m.

Major Braithwaite (Buckrose)

I should not intervene in this Debate did I not feel that a tremendous responsibility rests upon Members of this House to evolve some sort of scheme to make this essential industry attractive to the people who have to work in it. Many things are wrong with it, as we all know, but it does not help the situation to go over the old ground time after time without any idea of what we are going to do in the future. We obviously must have some plan whereby these young men coming into the industry are to find a congenial occupation there. Coalmining, and mining generally, is an honourable and necessary occupation, and every nation will have to find a quota of people to do it, if those nations are to stay strong in the industrial world. Certainly this country can ill afford to spare any effort to get the maximum possible production from this great source of national wealth which has brought our country to the great heights to which it has risen.

A great deal of abuse has been showered on the miners in many ways, but the miners themselves, as individuals, have worked as hard and as diligently as any other section of the population in this country during the war. The statistics of the drop in production of the miners are far less than the drop in production of building trade workers. That is a very serious statement to make, but I make it in all sincerity in this House. It is no good saying that these men have not done their job. We have altered their conditions in this war, which makes it impossible for them to carry on in the same way that they did before the war. In the early days of the war I pleaded with the Minister to restore the five-day week, particularly where the mines were mechanised. I said then, and say to-day, that by putting the mining industry back on a five-day week we should get as much coal as with a six-day week and have a revived industry. The men would have some chance of recuperating. This going down day after day out of the daylight, without enjoyment of ordinary pursuits, is something that many people do not understand. It has a psychological effect upon the minds of the men.

At the same time, I want the mining industry, owners and miners alike, to know that they have a joint responsibility to this country which this House could not allow them to evade. This industry must prepare to be a dominant and strong industry, capable of carrying on its back other industries which make the whole life of the nation possible. Always we are told that recruitment would be better if the mines were nationalised. Believe me, that does not matter a row of pins if the mines are controlled properly. The Ministry of Fuel and Power have full powers to-day just as they would have if the mines were nationalised. Every single power that we could give to a Government Department to run the mines is in the Minister's hands to-day. It is no use saying that to change the system would create a revolution in production. It would not do anything of the sort.

We must have proper skilled technical advice, and careful thinking and planning so that men who are coming into the industry will see that it is upon a sound, prosperous basis. Nobody likes to go on flogging a dead horse, but half the mines of this country are out-of-date, and they are dead horses. There has not been that long-term vision there should have been. No industry can afford to stand still. It must progress if it is to keep up with modem ideas. There are opportunities in this industry of giving to the work-people a greater expansion of productive power than in any industry I know of, if the necessary arrangements can be properly brought along.

On the other hand, if we are to have continued political revolution in this industry it will get the miners and the country nowhere. We must have a peaceful term during which some sound planning can be done. I believe that the wage structure set up by the Minister, giving a stable wage to the miners which is equitable in comparison with the wages in other industries, should afford an opportunity for a period of sound and careful planning which will do something to contribute to the future prosperity and strength of the industry. I earnestly hope that a great many of these boys who are coming into the pits will see the possibilities and will be able to handle the new machinery when it comes along, and so make it possible for the industry to prosper. An hon. Member opposite said that he would not put his boy into mining, but in a few years' time, if we can reorganise, I think he would be prepared to take those words back and to say that it is an honourable industry into which any man worthy of his salt and worthy to contribute to the national wellbeing would be glad to go.

5.50 p.m.

Mr. George Griiffiths (Hemsworth)

I would like to clear up the point about wages which the previous speaker has tried to put across. The hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose (Major Braithwaite) is now a coalowner; he told us that the other day. I wonder whether he is in the Coalowners' Association, and whether he is putting this point across to members similar to the hon. and gallant Member for Fylde (Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster). When he gets behind closed doors with the coalowners they have possibly another tale to tell him. I will leave that for the moment. I know he is very enthusiastic. He has been enthusiastic about what we call this "sunshine coal." One of my friends says it has been very profitable to some folk. We cannot get to know from the Ministry of Fuel and Power what this "sunshine coal" costs. Travelling up and down the country one sees hundreds and thousands of tons going to waste at the present time. It one travels into Derbyshire, there are thousands of tons there. Water is now coming on it and finding the muck in it, and it looks almost like whitewash.

I wish to turn to this question of wages and the Bevin boys, because on the day the Minister of Labour came to this House and announced that he would take a ballot of all the boys in the country to go into the mines I jumped up and asked if there was to be a Debate in this House. The Minister said he did not know whether the House required a Debate, but Members on this side of the House do know, and have repeatedly told him that the more Bevin boys went into the pits the less coal per head there would be, taking the average for the people working in and about the mines. [Interruption.] Certainly it is how the figure is brought down. These boys are brought in, and one or two men have to watch them for a month or two. It is all very well for the hon. Member to shake his head. In theory it may not be so, but in practice it is. There was talk of sending these lads to the coal face within about 10 minutes, but according to the regulations they cannot be sent to the coal face within two years, except under practical supervision. Does not that mean watching them and caring for them? When a man has an unskilled lad with him and he is anywhere near the coal face his attention is taken off his work and directed to the lad.

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Consett (Mr. Glanville), I know something about this point. We have been in the mining industry. I have had lads under me previous to my coming to this House. We had to sign for them—at least that used to be so, I do not know whether that is the case to-day—and were responsible for them. It is no use saying when these Bevin boys are put into the industry that it will increase production. I agree there are a few of these Bevin boys who are as good as gold, a few of them. I give them credit for it. But if you take a basket of nuts, and pick out the best, you will have two or three in your hand and the rest are left in the basket. That has been the case as far as these Bevin boys are concerned.

The hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose said that miners had a guaranteed wage. That is all moonshine, it is ridiculous. He does not yet understand wages in the mining industry. A man only gets the guaranteed wage if he works six days a week, and what man at the coal face can do that to-day? I say that a man working at the coal face for five days a week is doing as much as any healthy man can do. He may take it out of himself by working six days in one week, but then he comes back next week for four days, and there is no guaranteed wage for him. If a man works for five days a week he is not guaranteed his Porter award of £5 that week. Why? Because he has lost a shift. There are exceptionally few men working in the mines to-day who get the guaranteed wage. Only some men at a day wage get a guaranteed wage. In fact I know there are some men at the present time who have got easy jabs. There are a few easy jobs in the pit, but not at the coal face. [Interruption,] Somebody says "The manager." We will leave the managers out of this. They are worried, they can hardly get any sleep. But some men have an easy job and they may be doing double shifts. I saw one of my friends the other day, aged about 64 years. He said, "I have eleven shifts in this week," I said "What have you been doing?" He replied, "I am in the stables." He can manage eleven shifts in the stables, feeding the horses, but there is no man who can, week in and week out, work his six shifts at the pit face.

The hon. and gallant Member on the other side delighted me with one sentence. Now he is in the Coalowners' Association he will be able to put this across both to the Derbyshire coalowners and the Yorkshire coalowners. He can say, "Five days a week the pit must work. Are the men to get six days' wage for it? "When he puts that across at Sheffield, Nottingham or Chesterfield it will be a case of the devil among the tailors with the coal-owners. They say they want the six days' work as it is now. I hope when the Minister replies he will give us some statistics about these Bevin boys. The hon. and gallant Member for Fylde has stated that about 40 per cent. of the Bevin boys have said they would stay in the industry. I am astounded. I do not think any man who has had any conversation with them can say that four out of 10 have so decided. I was on my feet quickly to ask him about it. I will say that there are not two Bevin boys out of 10 of that view.

Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster

Let us get this right. It is no good the non. Member shouting across at me like that. What I said in fact was that four months ago 40 per cent. of the Bevin boys and optants had opted to stay after the war. I said I had to make a change to-day, because in the light of further experience it was shown that the optants exceeded the percentage of the Bevin boys who wish to stay. In the case of the Bevin boys the percentage was from 22½ to 25. While in the case of the optants the percentage was 50. I am not saying that 40 per cent. of the Bevin boys opted to stay in. I have said that a percentage of about 25 have done so. Even if we reduced that by a further figure it is considerably in advance of the figure put forward by the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker).

It being Six o'Clock, the Motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain McEwen.]

Mr. Griffiths

Of course, the hon. and gallant Member used the figure of 40 per cent.—he spoke of optants and Bevin boys. I am sorry that I misquoted him. But I will guarantee that when the war is over, and these lads have the opportunity to go out, if the hon. and gallant Member and I survive the next General Election I shall be able to prove to him that these lads have gone back in a very short time to the jobs they had before they came into the industry, or into apprenticeship, or to Cambridge, Oxford, or some other such place.

6.1 p.m.

Mr. Ness Edwards (Caerphilly)

I want to say to the hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose (Major Braithwaite) how pleased we are to have his testimony in these Debates, and how refreshing it is to hear some of his forthright statements. One thing that impressed me was his remark that he hoped that the industry would become an honourable industry. The assumption is that it is the reverse to-day.

Major Braithwaite

I made no suggestion that this was a dishonourable industry now, or that it had been at any other time; but I said that I hoped it would form an honourable occupation, in accordance with the desire of those who wish to work in it.

Mr. Edwards

I am sorry, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman has fallen from the position of grace in which I put him. Perhaps he will improve as time goes on. Some time ago, I was invited by the superintendent of one of the Bevin boys' hostels to go and talk to the boys in an objective way about the necessity of pulling their weight in this industry. After seeing the hostel, I quite understood the desire of many people in the village to go and live there. These boys are very well housed, and the amenities that they enjoy are admirable. On the whole, these Bevin, boys are a fine type of boys. What amazed me was to hear that they are called the "storm troopers" of the industry. While I felt, when this procedure was introduced, that they would have no effect in improving production, I was pleased that a knowledge of this industry was being spread more widely among the population, and that the hazards and ugliness of this occupation would be better understood as a result. I tried to point out to these boys that this industry was at the basis of prosperity in this country, that our hopes as an industrial nation rested upon this industry, and that at some time someone would have to put the industry on a basis which was sure and stable if Britain was to survive. I tried to capture their imaginations in that way.

I am sorry to say that these Bevin boys were utterly cynical about it all. The boys from the public schools, who had had the maximum educational opportunity, were the most scathing in their condemnation of the industry. They were horrified by the nature of their employment. They regarded the industry as one of the last in which they would like to obtain a livelihood. It is very regrettable; because if this industry perishes, Britain perishes. I have seen that the coalowners, too, have recognised this, and have appointed Mr. Robert Foot. [Interruption.] I hope he will work his passage and to the credit of the country. He has a marvellous chance and a stupendous job—a job at which my hon. Friend and his chief have failed. If the loss of production of coal in this country had been as great in his predecessor's time he would not have lasted half the time. With the present Minister of Fuel and Power in charge, production in the collieries has decreased all the time. We have had a bit of make-weight from the "sunshine coal" face—probably the only place where an increase has come about.

Mr. Robert Foot, in a letter to "The Times" to-day, has also discovered that there is something wrong with this industry. He has already discovered that, until this industry is put right, it will retain no one and only a sense of moral duty will keep any body of men in that industry. Two things, in my view, are necessary. First, this industry, more than any other, ought to be an industry run in the interests of the nation as a whole, because it is such an ugly occupation that it must be given a moral purpose. The next thing is that it must be conducted in such a way as to give the maximum contribution to our national wealth, and, in making that maximum contribution, no section in that industry should be drawing an undue proportion of the wealth that is produced. I think those are the lines on which every decent citizen ought to proceed in looking at this industry. I do not want these political rows in the mining industry. They do not do the miners any good; I do not care what harm they do to the coal-owners. I think they are the most backward, tribal section of employers that exist in this country.

The present form of control has contributed as much to the unsettlement of the minds of the Bevin boys as the nature of the industry itself. Many of these boys are exceedingly intelligent. They have had maximum opportunities of seeing other industries, and they know how they are being run. They then come into the mining industry, and they see how it is run under this farce of control. They see so many men, who carry out their own functions of service to the employer with legal authority, whose salaries are paid by the State, and who still discharge the old functions of the employers' representatives under the guise of nominees of control. I regret very much, from the production point of view, that this experiment is a failure, but I am very glad in my heart that knowledge of the hazards of the mining industry has been made more general to the whole of this nation.

6.9 p.m.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. Tom Smith)

When the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) gave notice in July that he would raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment, he had in mind a fairly narrow point, but a very important one. That was the reluctance of boys from miners' families to go underground. With his usual fairness and sincerity, the hon. Member dealt with that to-day, but he could not limit it, and dealt with the general question of man-power in the industry, and from that, we have ranged over nearly every topic connected with the industry. I have only one thing to say to my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Ness Edwards). I do not agree with his statement that the present control has failed.

Mr. Ness Edwards

It has.

Mr. Smith

It has not. I do not want to debate it, but I reserve the right to say that I do not agree that it has failed, and at some other time we might pursue that matter. Let us look at the position we are in to-day. My hon. Friend the Member for Leigh asked that a committee be set up to ascertain why young men will not go down the coal mines. There is no need for a committee. We had a committee a couple of years ago which issued a report called the Forster Report. It was an excellent report and anyone who will read paragraph 8 very carefully will find that there is absolute clarity as to why boys are reluctant to go underground. My hon. Friend the Member for Consett (Mr. Glanville) said that he had a lad who had decided at an early age that he would not work in the pit if he could help it. The reluctance of boys to go under- ground is not a new thing. It started many years ago. My own father, who was a miner, always said that I would never work in the pit while he lived, and I did not. I went into the pit after he died.

Mr. James Griffiths (Llanelly)

The other day I re-read the Samuel Commission Report and found there evidence that in the previous year 30,000 young lads had volunteered for the pit in excess of the places available, so that up to 1927 there were more boys willing to go to the pit than were taken.

Mr. Smith

I was coming to that point. In those days men working in the pit used to say, "My lad will not work in the pit if I can help it." It is the natural desire of parents to see their boys get on, and many miners' boys have attended secondary schools and have come out with distinction, as anyone who has spent any time on the Miners' Welfare Scheme will know. These parents want their boys to get on. In those days there was this difference. Mining was more in isolation than it is to-day. There was no transport to neighbouring places and scarcely any other occupation in the locality, and boys were compelled to go underground. About 30,000 boys volunteered for the mines in 1924, and there are about 12,000 a year now going down the mines.

This is a serious thing and a problem that has to be faced. Frankly, we know the reason why they do not go down. While there is a lot to be done in mining, you can never make it as comfortable as work in an office. It will always be a hard industry, and when the hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose (Major Braithwaite) told me that mining is not an honourable occupation he could not mean that, for anyone who has worked in the pit is not ashamed of his occupation. This question of work in the mines is being tackled. My hon. Friend the Member for Leigh wanted to give a number of inducements. Let us be frank. We have recently made some progress with regard to conditions underground generally, and with regard to the position of boys in particular. The Porter Tribunal, among other things, recommended that the youths in the pit should be entitled to a substantial increase in wages, and they got a minimum wage of 70s. at 18, rising to £5 a week at 21 years of age, with corresponding slight decreases to certain workers. Compared with what it was before, we have made some progress, and that is all to the good.

Mr. Sloan

Ten shillings a week.

Mr. Smith

It was more than 10s. a week. We know what the boys' wages were, and it was certainly an advance in the right direction. Another thing that has to be kept in mind is what has already been done. One of the worst features of going into the pit in the old days as a boy was that you had no training. Nobody taught you anything.

Mr. Sloan

Your father trained you.

Mr. Smith

Not in every part of the coalfields. That system was not uniform. If a boy got with a decent fellow, he taught him, but there was no training in the sense in which we have it to-day.

Mr. Sloan

What value does the hon. Gentleman place on the training they are getting now?

Mr. Smith

If we are to admit that training does not matter, for heaven's sake let us say so, but the training we are giving to-day to juveniles is excellent. I want to pay a tribute to the Forster Report—

Mr. Foster (Wigan)

It is a waste of time.

Mr. Smith

With regard to juvenile training, I do not think it is a waste of time. I went down to see one pit which has started training and I saw the boys in the classroom in the successive stages until they were ready to go to the coal face. They were a most alert body of boys. They were given lectures and shown models of the mine. They were shown how to work a safety lamp, they were taken into a pit and into a gallery, where they were taught how to put the chain on the end of a locker, and so on. They were taught how to set props and withdraw props and, when they got to the working face, they had acquired some pit sense and some safety-first principles. Do not let us be ashamed to admit the progress we are making.

Mr. Foster

Is the hon. Gentleman submitting that you can make colliers or miners in the classroom?

Mr Smith

No, Sir.

Mr. Foster

Do they not require practical experience before they reach that stage?

Mr. Smith

We are talking about training for juveniles, and I hope my hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (Mr. Foster) will agree with me, looking back on his own experience, that it is certainly right to have these boys trained before they get underground, and, when they get underground, before they start the risky hard work. The Forster Report was issued in July, 1942. By November a provisional training scheme was set up. On 1st February, 1944, an order was made dealing with the training of both dilutees, optants and elderly people and also of juveniles. My hon. Friends may be interested to learn that a good deal of progress has been made with regard to these training centres. Officers are being appointed, and real progress is being made. I have attended some of the classes, and I have seen the interest of the boys. While I appreciate that there is a good deal to be done, let us admit that we are making some progress.

So far as the Bevin boys are concerned, the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Ness Edwards) gave his experiences and others have given theirs; may I give mine? I have been to some of the hostels, and the accommodation and amenities are excellent. I have talked to a good many Bevin boys in the pits and away from the pits. While some do not like the work, detest it, and are prepared to leave the moment they can get out, war or no war, there are others who are making the best of it.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Yes, making the best of it.

Mr. Smith

I said, "How do you like it?" They said, "We do not like it at all." "Are you making the best of it?" "Certainly." "What is going to happen when it is over?" One said, "So far as I am concerned, I am going back to Kent as quickly as I can"; but some of them said, and that pleased me, "Well, after all, it is not quite as bad working underground as we had been led to believe."

Mr. Murray (Spennymoor)

Did my hon. Friend ask how many would stay in the industry?

Mr. Smith

I do not agree with any of the percentages which have been given. In the interests of the future of the industry, I hope the figure given by the hon. and gallant Member for Fylde (Lieut.-Colonel Lancaster) is correct. I will put it no higher than that. We are all agreed that there is something wrong with the industry, and that something must be done. It has been said more than once that the industry must be made more attractive, and I agree. There are many ways in which it can be made more attractive.

Mr. Sloan

Tell us.

Mr. Smith

I could detail a lot, without going into the question of the ownership of the industry. For example, when lads work underground, there ought at least to be a guarantee of a measure of security and some promise of advancement, although nobody can tell me that every boy going into a pit will become a colliery manager, because he will not. Our own Federation appreciated, some years ago, the fact that a number of things could be done to make the industry attractive. With regard to safety, I want to say that if there is anything that can be done to make pits safer than they are now, it ought to be done without any regard to the cost involved. I am pleased to say that with the attention that is now being paid to underground conditions, there is a slight reduction in our fatal accident rate, which is certainly all to the good. If my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. D. Grenfell) will not mind me saying so, I think he is entitled to a little credit for the appointment of additional inspectors, for which he was responsible some time ago, and the attention paid to roof control by some very efficient people.

With regard to wages and hours, a five-day week has been put forward. I have never been adverse to that, but the trouble is to get it from the industry. We all know pits where it is physically impossible for men to work six days a week at the coal face. A colliery manager told me recently that he did not expect his men to do it. But the question of a five-day week, or a shorter working day, is not one that can be dealt with in an Adjournment Debate. I would remind my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Buckrose that the industry itself is not agreed on the five-day week, but my right hon. Friend is prepared to consider anything that can be put forward which will make for betterment in this industry. In addition to what can be done under- ground, if mining in the future is to live, and young men are not to leave their colliery villages, more attention must be paid to social conditions in their localities. Attention has certainly to be paid to social conditions—better houses and so on. I hope to see the time come when we shall tackle that, and the removal of pit heaps. We have been discussing means of doing it and I am satisfied that we can do it if we get down to it.

With regard to wastage, the greatest wastage that we have at the moment is through men who leave the industry on medical certificates. That is not an easy question to tackle but it is one that is constantly under review. With regard to wastage from accidents—the fatal accident rate is still showing a decline—we have made some progress with regard to rehabilitation in fracture cases. The rehabilitation centres in different parts of the country are excellent. They are doing a fine job of work and they are appreciated by the patients who have been treated in them. With regard to silicosis, we have been able through the Home Office to do a little. With regard to pneumoconiosis, a problem which has given South Wales anxiety and which wants watching constantly, we have not lost any time in our efforts to prevent it. On the whole, while there is still a lot to be done, let us admit that we have made some progress.

As one who has spent the whole of his working life in the industry, it has been one of my greatest pleasures to be able to pay attention to health, welfare and safety during these two and a half years, and I am certainly willing to give an account of my stewardship anywhere, at any time. While there is still much to be done, a lot has been and is being done and I think we ought to admit it. No one complains of my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh raising this subject. The problem of man-power in the pits is receiving our attention nearly every day of the week. Anything we can do to maintain adequate man-power we shall do but it is not easy problem. "Difficult as it is, we have done what we believe to be the right thing and we shall continue to do it.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes after Six o' Clock.