§ 3. Mr. Peter Freemanasked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that a pit pony at Bedlington was recently considered to be unfit by the driver, who refused to work it; whether the pony was examined under working conditions; why permission was refused to the driver to be present during the examination, which took place in the stable; and whether he will cause further inquiries to be made, in view of the fact that other miners also considered the pony was not fit to do this work.
§ Mr. GaitskellI am aware that a putter at this Colliery, who was not the driver, alleged that a pony named "Ned" was unfit for work. The driver of the pony had made no complaint. "Ned" was examined by a veterinary surgeon and 1532 subsequently under working conditions by one of His Majesty's Inspectors of Horses in Mines, both of whom found the pony to be fit to perform its allotted task. As regards the last part of the Question, a further visit was made by the Inspector of Horses on 9th June. He was informed by the horsekeeper that no complaints had been received about the pony's fitness since his previous visit. He found that the pony had worked regularly, was in good condition and, in his opinion, had not been and is not being overworked.
§ Mr. FreemanMay I ask my right hon. Friend whether these small ponies do not need special protection, as they are working in bad conditions underground? Is he aware that the miner who originally made the complaint was told by his foreman that "the pony is going on and if you want to make any trouble you can go," and then, after having made further complaint, he was refused permission to be present at the inquiry?
§ Mr. GaitskellI think my answer shows that the fullest possible inquiries have already been made, and that the person who made the complaint was not really concerned with the pony.
§ Lieut.-Commander Gurney BraithwaiteAre we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman, in his capacity as Minister of Fuel, is responsible for the fate of this unhappy pony, but not for members of the Coal Board?
§ Mr. MurrayCan the Minister say why permission was refused to the boy who was driving this pony, because many of these lads have a great affection for their animals?
§ Mr. GaitskellIt is not a question of permission being refused to the driver of the pony; the man who made the complaint was not the driver of the pony.
§ Mr. MolsonOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask how it is that a Question of this kind has been admitted? I venture to suggest that this is exactly the kind of detailed question which, according to the intention of the decision taken about this, should not be brought before the House but should be dealt with as a matter of the administration of the Coal Board?
§ Mr. SpeakerYes, but may I inform the hon. Member that this is not a matter 1533 of purely local administration. There is a responsibility of the Inspector of Mines which goes outside that. There are several questions which go outside that too. This is a responsibility which is not local administration, and, therefore, the question is perfectly in Order.
§ Air-Commodore HarveyOn a further point of Order, and to take the matter a step further, supposing I put down a Question dealing with the air-worthiness of an air liner in one of the Corporations, would that be accepted?
§ Mr. SpeakerI should like notice of that because I had not thought about air. This was a coal question, and I cannot shift from coal to air, from underground to overground, quite so quickly as all that. If there is any question of inspectorship responsibility then, of course, the Question is in Order if it is not a matter of purely internal administration.
§ Mr. FreemanIn view of the unsatisfactory reply, I intend to raise the matter on the Adjournment.