HC Deb 30 June 1954 vol 529 cc1363-70

(1) None of the provisions of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, shall apply to any premises forming part of a mine or quarry.

(2) In the case of any premises to which all or any of the provisions of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, would apply but for subsection (1) of this section, the Ministers may by order direct that that subsection shall not apply to the premises and that the premises shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as not forming part of a mine or quarry.

(3) In the case of any premises to which all or any of the provisions of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, apply, being premises which, but for the proviso to subsection (3) of section (Meaning of "mine" and "quarry") of this Act, would be deemed for the purposes of this Act to form part of a mine or quarry, the Ministers may by order direct that neither any of the provisions of those Acts nor that proviso shall apply to the premises.

(4) In the case of premises which are a factory within the meaning of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, or to which all or any of the provisions of those Acts apply as if the premises were a factory, being premises which, though not forming part of a mine or quarry, are occupied by the owner of a mine or quarry and used solely for the purpose of the provision or supply for or to a single mine or quarry, or jointly for or to more than one mine or quarry, of services or electricity, the Ministers may by order direct that, while the order is in force, none of the provisions of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, shall apply to the premises and the premises shall be deemed for the purposes of this Act to form part of the mine or quarry or, as the case may be, of such one of them as may be specified in the order.

(5) References in subsections (1) to (4) of this section to provisions of the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, shall be construed as exclusive of references to sections one hundred and seven and one hundred and eight of the Factories Act, 1937 (which respectively apply other provisions of that Act to building operations undertaken by way of trade or business or for the purposes of any industrial or commercial undertaking and to works of engineering construction so undertaken) and to the other provisions of those Acts in so far as, by virtue of the said sections one hundred and seven and one hundred and eight, they are applicable to such operations or works; but—

  1. (a) the said section one hundred and seven shall not apply to any building operations undertaken below ground in a mine; and
  2. (b) the said section one hundred and eight shall not apply to any works of engineering construction undertaken at a mine (whether above or below ground) or at a quarry.

(6) Where any machinery or apparatus is situate partly in a mine or quarry and partly in a factory, the Ministers may by order direct that it shall be deemed, for the purposes of this Act and the Factories Acts, 1937 and 1948, either to be wholly situate in the mine or quarry and not to be situate in the factory or to be wholly situate in the factory and not to be situate in the mine or quarry.

(7) In this section the expression "the Ministers" means the Minister and the Minister of Labour and National Services and references to building operations and works of engineering construction shall be construed in like manner as if they were references contained in the Factories Act, 1937.—[Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

In spite of the improvement which is being made by the Clause which the House has just passed, there is a certain range of what we may call "fringe" activities for which, even with the improved definition, it would remain uncertain whether they were, in fact, occupations and processes coming under mining law or under the Factories Acts. At first sight it is difficult to understand why that is so, but I think I can give the House an example.

4.0 p.m.

There are certain processes connected with the crushing of stone which are purely mining or quarrying activities, but when tar or other material is added to the stone, that has been sometimes held in the past to be a factory activity. It is absurd when two things are done by substantially the same plant in substantially the same building that it should not be possible to decide clearly which they should be, rather than let them oscillate and during one period of the year be under the Mines Acts and during another period of the year be under the Factories Acts. It is therefore provided in the proposed new Clause that the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Fuel and Power should consult together about such processes and have power to decide the matter by means of an order.

Mr. Gerald Nabarro (Kidderminster)

I thank my right hon. Friend for endeavouring to clarify this point which I put to him before the Bill passed its Second Reading. I should like a little further clarification on one aspect of the matter.

Every colliery has a maintenance staff at the pit-head to deal with the mechanical and electrical equipment used in the pit. On whom will the responsibility devolve for periodical inspection of the mechanical and electrical equipment in workshops of that kind? Will it be an inspector mines, responsible for health and safety, or a factory inspector under the Factories Acts?

Mr. Lloyd

That matter would come under a mines inspector.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time.

Mr. Harold Finch (Bedwellty)

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in subsection (5, a), after operations," to insert: and the said section one hundred and eight shall not apply to any works of engineering construction. In moving this Amendment, Mr. Speaker, may I deal with the next Amendment, to leave out paragraph (b) of subsection (5)?

Mr. Speaker

It will be very convenient to do so.

Mr. Finch

The new Clause which has been proposed by the Minister of Fuel and Power makes provision whereby undertakings or premises regarded as part of a mine or quarry shall be excluded from the Factories Acts. On this side of the House we realise the importance of that provision and we have no objection to what is set out in the Clause.

The Clause goes on to say that in certain circumstances the Minister may by order arrange that some of the premises may from time to time be brought either under the Factories Acts or under the Bill. That will depend upon circumstances. The proposed new Clause says that if they come under the Bill, Sections 107 and 108 of the Factories Act, 1937, shall apply. Up to this stage we quite agree with the general purpose of the new Clause.

We are very surprised that at the end it states: The said section one hundred and eight shall not apply to any works of engineering construction undertaken at a mine (whether above or below ground) or at a quarry. We are very concerned about the position of engineering constructional works at the surface, which may be similar in character to those in any town far away from the mining industry. The men employed may have been transferred to the undertaking from a city or town and may not be miners in the proper sense of the word. Therefore, they come within the provisions of Section 108 of the Factories Act, 1937, many of the provisions of which have not yet been put into operation. I am referring to surface engineering, and the Bill cannot hope to deal adequately with the safeguards which apply to men working in those circumstances.

What puzzles us is why the Clause should stipulate that Section 108 shall not apply to constructional engineering. As it is not part of a mine or quarry, it must come under the Factories Acts, but why does the new Clause state that Section 108 shall not apply in those circumstances? The constructional engineering regulations cover such things as scaffolds constructed with more than three tiers. They say that no trestles shall be erected on a scaffold and that the platform has to be of a certain height and width. The Bill cannot hope to deal with that aspect of these matters. It seems that people engaged in constructional engineering will remain outside Section 108, and that will place them in a difficult position, because they will get no protection. What is the intention of the Government in saying that Section 108 shall be excluded?

Mr. Albert Roberts (Normanton)

I beg to second the Amendment.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. L. W. Joynson-Hicks)

I think I can reassure the hon. Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Finch) on this point, which incidentally is a fresh point to be taken on the Bill There has been no change in regard to this provision since the Committee stage and there is no change in the practice.

In the past, all inspection of engineering works has been carried out by inspectors who were mining engineers and whom we consider are competent to carry out the inspections and to apply the law. In practice, there will be no change, but in substance it was considered desirable to make a change.

Under the old law as it would be applied under the Bill, the Factories Acts regulations might well be regarded as applicable to surface operations and to quarries, but it is clearly not the intention of anybody concerned, nor of the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment to the proposed new Clause, that these operations should come under factory law. The line of demarcation had to be made somewhere and the best place was considered to be subsection (5, b) of the proposed new Clause. We are convinced that this is the best method of procedure to continue the existing practice, while giving it a more legal and proper framework.

Mr. Stan Awbery (Bristol, Central)

I should like to have the main question cleared up. There are men producing stone for road-making and they would come under the Bill. There are men engaged on the quarryside who find the stone and there are men engaged in tar manufacture. How is the Bill to apply to the quarrymen who are getting the stone, the men who are handling the stone, and the men who are producing tarmac?

Mr. Noel-Baker

I do not know whether I rightly understood what the Parliamentary Secretary said, but if I did, I do not think that he quite answered the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Finch) who moved the Amendment. He was concerned about engineering construction on the surface in respect of which the workmen ought to have protection, and we think that that protection ought to be given under the Factories Act. As we understand the Clause, that protection would not be given. Surely it is desirable that it should be given. Can the Parliamentary Secretary add a little in explanation?

Mr. A. Roberts

One can expect that in the future far more constructive engineering will take place in colliery yards than hitherto, and I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Finch) has made a very important point indeed. I do not take as an example what has happened in the past, but what one can expect to happen in the future, and I agree that some real measure of protection, such as that quoted by my hon. Friend under the Factories Act, should be put into operation.

Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd

I think that there is a real misunderstanding here, although I do not think that there is any difference of purpose. I want to make it quite clear that we desire that works of engineering construction should come under full and proper control. I accept the point made by the hon. Member for Normanton (Mr. A. Roberts) that in future such works may be more ambitious—we hope they will be—and that therefore it is more important that they should be brought under proper control.

It happens that I was concerned with the passage through this House of the Factories Act, and I agree that although there was an advance made on the previous provisions, the provisions in regard to engineering construction in the Factories Act are very and necessarily wide because they have to deal with works of engineering construction which differ enormously in the different sections of the industry.

I think the House will appreciate that as long as we get regulations and proper provisions for dealing with engineering construction, it would be better that those regulations should deal, not with all phases of engineering construction, but particularly with the engineering works that take place at collieries. That we have power to do under the Bill, and that is what we propose to do. I think that we shall get better regulations, and better enforcement, governing engineering construction under the Mines and Quarries Bill than under the old Factories Act.

I will now deal with the point raised by the hon. Gentleman about the men who would be in these fringe industries. I explained earlier that it was our purpose to enable us, in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, to decide which was the best method for dealing with those fringe industries. I should not like to say exactly what will happen, but the way in which it will be decided will be by the Ministers entering into consultation with the industries and with the trade unions and then making an order, which I hope will be acceptable.

Mr. Finch

The Minister's explanation has really strengthened our Amendment. The fact remains that the Clause says: the said section one hundred and eight shall not apply to any works of engineering construction undertaken at a mine (whether above or below ground) or at a quarry. We are concerned with works of engineering construction on the surface, and we contend that Section 108 of the Factories Act should apply in those circumstances. That Act contains safeguards peculiar to constructional engineering, and the same safeguards cannot be got under the Mines and Quarries Bill. I have already cited ladders and scaffolds, and could go on giving other examples. I repeat that this new Clause stipulates that Section 108 shall not apply, and, therefore, whatever the intentions of the right hon. Gentleman may be, and whatever the practice has been in the past, we must insist upon the Amendment.

4.15 p.m.

Mr. Goronwy Roberts (Caernarvon)

Will the Minister explain the assurance which he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Awbery) about quarries so as to include the kind of manufacturing process which is so common in the slate-quarrying districts, particularly in Wales? I raised the matter in Committee when the right hon. Gentleman was, I think, quite seized of its importance, and when he responded quite sympathetically. I wonder whether he could now add to what he said in reply to my hon. Friend by giving an assurance that he will use this enabling power to decide whether the manufacturing sheds, so-called, which trim and condition the stone, quarried perhaps at some distance from those sheds, should or should not come within the provisions of the Factories Act, 1937.

If I understood the right hon. Gentleman correctly, he said that before he decided whether a certain aspect of quarrying bordering on manufacturing should come within the Bill, his Department would examine the matter. I followed the right hon. Gentleman's assurances as far as the point made by my hon. Friend was concerned, and I am only anxious that the slate quarry unions, who are interested in the point, should know that it includes their members.

Amendment to the proposed Clause negatived.

Clause added to the Bill.