HC Deb 26 January 1953 vol 510 cc803-12

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

10.0 p.m.

Mr. William Hamilton (Fife, West)

I wish to draw attention tonight to a problem which is of very special interest to the people of Fife and one which should be of very great interest to the Government and to the country as a whole. I refer to the need for the establishment of some light industry in particular in central Fife. I am glad to see that the Scottish Office is represented on the Government Front Bench tonight.

The case for a light industry in Fife has been put by the local authorities to successive Governments over the past few years with little or no effect. I believe, and I think the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland would agree, that at the moment there is more need for the establishment of this light industry than there has ever been in the past, and I say that for one or two obvious reasons.

In the first place, we in the United Kingdom have a desperate need for more coal. If we do not get more coal there may be no national survival. In 1950, the National Coal Board produced what they called their "Plan for Coal." I shall not develop the figures given in that plan in any great detail because the Minister will, no doubt, have made himself familiar with them, but it is quite obvious from those figures that the Fife coalfield is going to expand enormously in the next 12 or 15 years.

In the period 1950–65, the Fife and Clackmannan coalfield is going to produce about 50 per cent. of the additional output of coal in Scotland, and so far as capital expenditure is concerned, £23 million out of £69 million for the whole of Scotland will be spent on this coalfield. That means that thousands of additional men will be required there.

It is quite true that a great deal of that development is going to take place in the East of the area, although there is going to be some development in the central area with which we are concerned tonight. It is clear from this plan that Fife has a tremendous industrial future, and that the industrial prosperity not only of Scotland, but of the United Kingdom, depends to a very large extent on the ambitious plan put forward for increasing coal production in this area.

That being the case, it is surely obvious to the Government that we must speed up this plan as fast as we can, and it seems to me that one of the first things we must do to that end is to attract miners into the area from the West of Scotland where the coalfields are, in the main, declining. Miners have, in fact, come from the West over the past few years, and I believe that the transfer system has met with quite a large measure of success. But there are increasing signs of dissatisfaction among these miners from the West because of the lack of social amenities and because there are no jobs, maybe for their young wives, in cases where they have no young family commitments, and no jobs for their daughters.

When I knew that this Adjournment debate was to take place I got in touch with the National Coal Board and I received a letter from the Divisional Labour Director which I should like to quote to the House. It is very illuminating and I do not think that the Divisional Labour Director would object to these quotations. He said: In the course of transferring men, particularly from closures or partial closures in the Central West Area, the question was asked repeatedly by these men, whether or not there was suitable industry or prospects of employment either for their daughters or non-mining members of the family, and it was not an uncommon experience for potential transferees to turn down the coalmining employment offered on the grounds that no such suitable employment existed. He added: With light industry available offering employment to girls and other members of the family, in addition to being an additional inducement to transfer, it would also assist transferred families to more quickly settle in, and remove any desire to get back to their home area. The whole letter is in that vein.

I can cite individual experiences in the Ballingry area and elsewhere where miners have complained that their daughters are travelling to and fro to the west every day because they cannot obtain jobs in central Fife. That clearly is a very serious problem. Unemployment among families in this area is very much higher than the average for Scotland as a whole.

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to an answer to a Question which I asked on 28th October last year. I asked the Minister of Labour: … the total number of women registered as wholly unemployed in Scotland in August, 1952; what is this figure expressed as a percentage of the total unemployed; and whether the percentage of women registered as wholly unemployed in central Fife is greater than that for the country as a whole."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 28th October, 1952; Vol. 505, c. 1729.] I found that over half of the wholly unemployed in central Fife are women, as compared with a third approximately for Scotland as a whole. Approximately 500 women and girls were wholly unemployed in the Dunfermline, Cowdenbeath and Inverkeithing exchange areas in December last year. In addition, there is a feeling in the area which has been expressed by the local authority that there is a considerable amount of concealed unemployment among married women who would do a job of work if they had not to travel so far to jobs in light industry. There is in fact very little light industry apart from that in the textile firms in Dunfermline, Kinross and Leslie and the aircraft industry in Donibristle.

The population of the small village of Oakley in this area was a few hundreds in 1945. In 1960 the population of this village will be very nearly 4,000. Today three bus-loads of girls and women travel daily from Oakley to Alloa to work in the textile industry there. The distance is approximately 10 miles, which means that these girls have to rise very early in the morning and get back very late at night. They are faced with very heavy bills for bus fares by the end of the week. The whole thing is a waste of time and money and altogether most unsatisfactory.

In the Cowdenbeath-Lochgelly area it is estimated that 3,000 travel daily to Dunfermline, Kinross, Leslie and Donibristle, and that of this number approximately 1,000 are women.

It is quite clear that in the area as a whole there is a surplus of female labour. There is clearly a lack of balance in the industrial set-up of the area, and I think the Minister would agree that that is neither economically nor socially desirable. I always think that there is a weakness socially in an area which is too one-sided industrially, and particularly so if there is a slump. We cannot visualise a coal slump in the near future, but should there be a slump in the coal industry eventually this area will be one of the most hard hit areas in the United Kingdom.

The other reason which compels me to raise this question is the vital need to get additional miners into the area. I had intended to quote exclusively from the Cairncross Report. This Report was issued last April and it made quite clear that one of the great needs of the United Kingdom, and particularly of Scotland, was to get some new light industry into the developing coal mining areas, and in particular Fife. That Report emphasises the possible conflict between national and local interests.

Both the national and local interests demand that there should be some diversification of industry in this area. I think the Labour Government was in some way at fault in not providing as much as it could for this diversification. Between 1945 and 1951 we find from the Cairncross Report that fewer new jobs were provided by new factories in Fife in proportion to the total insured population than in any other area in Scotland except the north.

The Cairncross Report goes on to say in paragraph 37 (c)—and I think this is the crux of the argument: … it could be reasonable to suppose that both in South Fife and in Midlothian there was scope for more industrial development and that such development would help to attract miners and their families. The Report also says in paragraph 13: … perhaps there is nowhere a greater need of a new direction for Government policy on industrial location than in such places as Fife and Midlothian. I would ask the Minister to take note of those words.

I want to ask the Minister one or two questions. Since that Report was issued, what have the Government been doing? What consultations have taken place between the Board of Trade, the Ministry of Labour, the Scottish Office and the local authorities? What action is intended to be taken? Quite clearly there are difficulties. I know the difficulties. I, with my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline Burghs (Mr. Clunie) have had consultations with the Ministry of Labour representatives and we are fully aware of the difficulties. But I would urge the Minister and the Government to treat this question as one of very great urgency. If we do not get the coal, our standard of living cannot rise as we all expect it to rise, and I would ask him to tell us what the Government intend to do.

10.15 p.m.

Mr. James Clunie (Dunfermline)

I am obliged for being called upon to make my contribution to the points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton). In the time at my disposal I wish to make a direct appeal to the Minister, not so much for what I hope he can do, but rather to give the authorities in Fife some encouragement in dealing with this question. My general submission is that sufficient evidence and data have been presented to justify setting up light industries in Fife.

Fife is my native county, and it is a tradition of this House always to respond to the human side of our problems. The problem of light industries in Fife arises from the developments which are hound to take place within the next two or three decades and which will affect that portion of Fife within which my constituency falls. Arising from those arguments, the problem that is going to affect the central part of Fife is that a considerable number of girls and boys must travel fairly long distances in order to find work. As a member of a local authority before coming to this House, I found that this was of great concern to all local authorities within my constituency as well as to miners considering the future of the members of their families.

In this Adjournment debate we are endeavouring to put the problem before the Minister. First of all it is a human problem because it arises from the development which has taken place in the East and West of Fife, leaving the problem in central Fife to be dealt with by the provision of light industries. There are one or two points I wish to put before the Minister. We want these light industries to absorb the female labour in central Fife and to provide employment for what I might term the non-mining labour. We also want them to safeguard the future population within that area.

Finally. I would say that while the Minister might not he able to do a great deal for us about light industries, he might use his influence to bring about a joint meeting of all the authorities concerned with the presence of some representatives from the Scottish Department in order that the whole of the problem might be considered. I hope the Minister will give us as much assistance as he can, and I am certain if such a joint conference is held it will serve a useful purpose. I have endeavoured to say as much as I can in five minutes, and so give the Minister a reasonable time to reply.

10.20 p.m.

Mr. A, Woodburn (Clackmannan and East Stirlingshire)

I wonder whether the Minister will permit me a minute or so as the third Member concerned with this problem, the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland being the other Member involved at the other end of the constituency. The House has just listened to the maiden speech here of my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline Burghs (Mr. Clunie), and I should like to congratulate him on the neatness and conciseness with which he put his points, especially in the short time at his disposal.

It seems to me that the work required to build houses for miners does not make the position very hopeful in the immediate future for the building of new factories, and if I am permitted I should like to make a constructive suggestion to the Board of Trade. The most important thing at the moment is to see that factories in the district are kept fully employed. There are big textile works at Alloa which absorb thousands, but such large-scale employment requires very big enterprises and the Government have no power to compel firms to go to these areas. Therefore, some inducement is required.

In the building of new factories, I would suggest that the Board of Trade make use of the Scottish Council of Industry with a view to getting small industries started in those areas where the miners are coming in by the thousand. We are very fortunate in Clackmannan because of the existence of a large number of small mills, but the Fife side depends very largely on Glen Rothes and some new developments are needed for that area. It is not likely that the Board of Trade are able to appreciate all the local niceties of this matter, and it would be much better if the Scottish Council of Industry could give some inducement, such as is given in the Development Areas, to get firms to establish themselves there. I know this is a big problem, and I cannot further develop it tonight.

Mr. Clunie

I should like to correct an impression created by my right hon. Friend the Member for East Stirling (Mr. Woodburn). I delivered my maiden speech in another part of this building.

10.22 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Mr. Henry Strauss)

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Stirling (Mr. Woodburn), the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton) and the hon. Member for Dunfermline Burghs (Mr. Clunie) for the brevity of their remarks, although it has given me so little time to reply. I am also very grateful to the hon. Member for Fife, West for courteously giving me some indication of the points he was going to raise. May I say at once a word about something with which he and the right hon. Gentleman dealt? They both mentioned, in effect, the Cairncross Report and the proposals which it contained.

The hon. Member for Fife, West quoted a pertinent passage that appears in paragraph 13 in which it is stated that there was a need for "a new direction for Government policy on industrial location." That places me in this difficulty. The Cairncross Committee, when describing Government action in paragraph 74 of the Report, say what they mean by a new direction for Government policy. It is quite clear that what they have in mind, as I think the right hon. Gentleman had in mind, was that Government should help in building factories under the Distribution of Industry Acts outside the development areas and they said that the considerations by which the Government should be guided should be industrial growth rather than unemployment. Whatever the merits or demerits of the proposal, it is clear that it would involve legislation. It is therefore not in order for me to deal with that aspect of the matter tonight.

If hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite want to see the difference between the Cairncross approach and that which has guided the Board of Trade, the Scottish Office and the Treasury, they need only compare paragraph 74 of the Report with paragraph 86 of the White Paper on the Distribution of Industry which the right hon. Gentleman's Government produced and which states the agreed criteria in this field.

Mr. Woodburn

I think that does not apply to the Scottish Council of Industry.

Mr. Strauss

As regards the help that the Government can give, what the hon. Gentleman has said is perfectly accurate. I have no wish to quarrel with a great deal of the facts and figures—without checking every one of them—which were given by the hon. Gentleman who opened this short debate. I think he would agree that male unemployment in the area is very low. He is right in thinking that in some parts of the area unemployment among women is relatively high. I think he will agree that the total unemployment is nowhere high in the coalfield. He is certainly right in saying that a large number of people, particularly women, travel daily to work away from where they live.

It is stated that there is in this area a developing coalfield. Development plans which the Fife County Council will in due course submit to the Department of Health for Scotland will no doubt have these facts and all other relevant facts in mind. I have little doubt that we shall all be in agreement that some complementary industrial development will be needed to keep pace with this development in the coal industry.

In answer to one of the many very pertinent questions which the hon. Member put to the Government and to various Ministers last October, the President of the Board of Trade stated, he will remember, that we were trying to attract suitable light industries to Central Fife. We have, of course, no power of compulsion, but so far as industrial development certificates are concerned, none has been refused in this area and there is not the least likelihood of any being refused. I am informed that since the war, new industrial developments completed or in prospect in Central Fife number 23. I know the hon. Member will forgive me for being brief.

There is also that important enterprise, the Glenrothes new town. The present population is 3,000. It is expected to increase to 9,000 in 1957. The work on water, drainage, shops and housing is proceeding according to plan. As Central Fife develops, it should afford excellent opportunities for light industries which will certainly be brought to the notice of prospective employers.

I am sorry that the time does not permit me to go into many other subjects, which were involved in the conclusion of the hon. Gentleman's speech, some of which would be out of order tonight. On the other matter, namely, the desire of Her Majesty's Government to attract, if they can, light industry to Central Fife, there is no difference between us.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes past Ten o'Clock.