ATOMIC ENERGY AUTHORITY (STAFF) (Hansard, 31 January 1955)

§ Mr. Airey Neave (Abingdon)

Last year, Parliament agreed to the setting up of an Atomic Energy Authority, and this House then debated, in addition to many complicated questions of administration, the future of the existing staff who had previously been working on atomic energy and their conditions of employment. On that occasion hon. Members asked the present Minister's predecessor, who is now Minister of Education, for certain assurances about security of employment and other matters. In general, fewer difficulties have been revealed during the past few months since that debate than had been expected by many hon. Members on both sides of the House.

It is fair to say that it is to the credit of all concerned—of the staff associations and of the Authority—that the negotiations on the future of the staff have gone fairly smoothly. Nevertheless, it was a complicated operation and I thought that it would be valuable to discuss the problems which remain, by way of an Adjournment debate, to review the progress that has occurred since the last debate, and to direct the attention of my right hon. Friend to a number of matters.

It is clear that the sudden influx of a large number of highly trained atomic workers into comparatively rural areas in different parts of the country gives rise to important problems for the people who live in those areas and for the local authorities who preside over their affairs. I do not for one moment suppose that atomic energy workers would claim any 864 special privileges in the areas in which they come to reside, but it is the responsibility, as the Minister will readily agree, of the Atomic Energy Authority to provide houses for the workers who come to live there, to see that there are sufficient facilities for the education of their children and also to be responsible for the welfare of the employees and the security of their employment.

I will deal, first, with the question of houses. It would be proper for me to congratulate the Authority on the arrangement it has made with local councils to build houses in various areas and, in particular, that of North Berkshire, my constituency, where the Atomic Energy Research Establishment is situated at Harwell. It has now been agreed by Abingdon Corporation that 500 new houses should be built for employees of the Establishment at Harwell. The industry, as it is now becoming, is likely to expand. Therefore, I should like to ask my right hon. Friend whether he will tell us what is the general building policy of the Authority for the future.

I realise that at Harwell, Aldermaston and Risley, where there are atomic establishments of varying types, the new employees will have to wait for several months for a house. Some distinction must be made between the employees of the Authority recruited from outside the area and those who are locally recruited and who are often semi-skilled or unskilled workers. The latter would be the responsibility, one might think, of the local authority. Naturally, local councils will have regard, as a matter of priority, to those persons who are on their housing lists in the first instance. Therefore, it would be convenient if my right hon. Friend would tell us the policy of the Authority towards building for these specialised workers, brought in from outside, on whom the whole future of the project depends, and give us an assurance that a steady flow of houses for the type of employee will continue.

Now I turn to what I regard as a very important point and a matter on which a great many employees of the Atomic Energy Authority are at present somewhat concerned. It may well be that it would not be unfair to say that perhaps a little more foresight in certain areas than, from information at my disposal, has been shown, might have been exercised in preparing for the influx into rural 865 areas of atomic workers and their families by providing for education of their children. It is quite clear that a large majority of these employees are young married persons and in the North Berkshire area, where Harwell is situated, on a great many of the atomic energy estates the birthrate is extremely high. Often the birthrate per thousand is double that of the national average for the United Kingdom. In Harwell, the estimated average number of children per year per 1,000 of the population is very often more than 30 on some of these housing estates.

Although that may be a welcome matter for the employees of the Authority who are thus producing children who may be able to carry on their work on this great project, nevertheless it raises a remarkably difficult problem for the local education authorities. I ask my right hon. Friend to maintain the fullest consultation with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Education upon this matter. He will be aware of the problems of the education authorities in North Berkshire. A number of new schools and a certain amount of additional school accommodation is planned in places like Chilton, Abingdon, Didcot and Wantage. A new grammar school is planned in Didcot for March, 1956. Yet this is not the only part of the country where workers are worried about the future education of their families. I instance the case of Windscale, in Cumberland. At present, in the Abingdon area there are definite signs of overcrowding in the schools, occasioned by this problem. Grammar school facilities are particularly required. Thus we have a secondary as well as a primary school problem in the area where Harwell is likely to expand. I think my right hon. Friend will agree that the same applies to Aldermaston and, in particular, to Windscale. It may well apply in other areas in the North of England where there are atomic energy establishments, although I am not sufficiently acquainted with the details to be able to say.

It may not be too much to ask that, in consultation with the Minister of Education, my right hon. Friend will consider the possibility of making these areas special areas, as it were, from the education point of view. Because of the high birthrate it is extremely difficult to assess when the peak will be reached for 866 this type of education in the future. That, of course, would not be forgetting the needs of children not connected with the atomic energy centres in the area. According to my information the staff negotiations to which I have referred have proceeded fairly smoothly and the Authority and staff associations are to be congratulated upon them. It would appear, from my information, that the major items of transfer of the staff from the Civil Service have been settled, but there are three points which need clarification, and if my right hon. Friend can do this, he will be rendering a great service to those who may not be sure about the position.

First, I am sure he will confirm that the practice of joint consultation between the Atomic Energy Authority and the staff side on future conditions of service ought to continue. Secondly, there is the question of the career prospects of those who are in the service of the Authority at the present time. My right hon. Friend well knows that those who have been civil servants in the past are used to a defined "pyramid," as it is called, of advancement; to some definite plan by which they receive promotion.

It so happens that the Atomic Energy Authority has been advertising certain posts in the newspapers and has required the existing staff, who have previously been in the Civil Service, to compete for those very appointments which they had been holding under the Ministry of Supply. In fact, as my right hon. Friend probably knows, in some cases they have applied for their own jobs and, fortunately, have got them back.

What I should like to know is what is the general policy of the Authority with regard to what might be described as the career structure for the employees in its service. Naturally, everyone who is employed fears uncertainty as to his future. These two matters are linked to a certain fear of redundancy that exists among the staff, according to my information, namely, that certain changes in international policy might occur which could affect those working, for example, in the Weapons Group. What will be their future in the event of certain changes, and what assurances can be given to them?

Thirdly, what is the position when atomic power stations, now in course of 867 construction, are completed and perhaps—though I do not know exactly what the plans may be in this respect—are taken over on some ultimate occasion by the British Electricity Authority? What will then be the position of the staff, and could assurances be given to them so that they may regard their future with a certain amount of confidence?

I want to make it clear to my right hon. Friend that, although many things have gone smoothly, the staff are naturally thinking seriously of their future, and the peacetime atomic energy project, which is a pioneering achievement that will influence the health and wealth of millions, depends on them. I therefore suggest to my right hon. Friend that we have an obligation to those who work in this service and who are employees of the Atomic Energy Authority to see that they feel secure and confident in their mission, by which it is hoped that atomic energy may prove a boon to peace-loving nations and will contribute to the welfare of mankind.

§ The Minister of Works (Mr. Nigel Birch)

We are indebted to my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave) for raising these questions tonight. He is the Member for Harwell, and, therefore, the Member for what might be described as the parent establishment of the Atomic Energy Authority. He has always taken a keen interest in this subject, and, as is apparent from his speech, is extremely well-informed about it.

My hon. Friend has raised a number of problems dealing with the welfare of those who work for the Atomic Energy Authority, and I shall try to deal with them in the few minutes that I have.

I want, first, to make a general point about housing and education. These problems are, of course, not peculiar to the employees of the Atomic Energy Authority. Such matters as the size of classes in primary schools, the number of grammar school places, or the difficulty of getting a house are matters which exercise the minds of most parents and most people in the country, as any Member of Parliament can testify. I feel it is worth making that point.

As to housing, my hon. Friend seemed not altogether dissatisfied with the progress made, but I should like to say one 868 or two words on the subject. My hon. Friend said that this was the responsibility of the Authority. I could not quite agree with that. I think that it is primarily the responsibility of the local authorities. The policy of the Authority is as far as possible to recruit staff locally—although only a certain part of the staff can be so recruited—and I think it fair to say that it must be the responsibility of the local authorities to look after the housing of people who are, and always have been, resident in their areas. So that is left to the local authorities.

On the other hand, of course, it is necessary in all the establishments to bring in many highly qualified men from outside their areas, and that presents a problem. If those people cannot be accommodated, the work will be held up; and they are not on the lists of the local housing authorities. In all these matters the local authorities have been very helpful, but they cannot always put up houses for all the new employees who must be brought in if things are to go ahead as we want. It is for that reason that a number of housing estates have been built, formerly by the Ministry of Supply, and now by the Authority.

On the whole, as I think my hon. Friend recognises, the policy has not worked too badly. He talked of people having to wait for some months. The waiting time varies between different establishments of the Authority from a few weeks to a year. I do not think that compares at all badly with the experience of people employed either by other public authorities or by industry. The record really has been quite good. The policy is, therefore, to rely on the local authorities for the people who live locally and to encourage the local authorities to do all they can for those who come in, but, in cases of extreme difficulty and urgency, for the Authority itself to build houses. That policy will continue.

My hon. Friend next raised the question of education. That is to a certain extent bound up with the housing problem. Different problems arise where the housing estates are situated within or near existing towns and where they are situated on isolated sites. This, again, is not primarily a problem for the Authority, but for the Ministry of Education and the local education authorities. Where, I think, the 869 Authority can help is in the following ways. First, it can give the longest possible warning to the local education authorities and to the Ministry of Education of its future plans; and that is what the Authority has tried to do. Secondly, it can, and does in some cases, allot buildings permanently or temporarily to the local education authority for use as schools; and it has set aside sites on which schools can be built in the future. There is no doubt that the local education authorities have been, on the whole, extremely helpful.

Parents are naturally anxious to see that their children get the best possible education—that, of course, does not apply only to parents employed by the Authority—and I have been into this matter, although it is not primarily my responsibility, and have discussed it with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education. I can say that the local education authorities have got a fairly firm grip on the situation and that, given all the difficulties of a large and rapid influx into certain areas, together with the high birthrate, they have not made a bad job of it. I am convinced that in the future they will make an even better job.

My hon. Friend referred to staff problems. Obviously, some of these problems will arise. There has been a dispute in the past as to whether it would be better to run the atomic energy project through a Government Department or through a public authority; and we decided, I think quite rightly, on the public authority. But nobody suggested that we should have a mixture of the two; if there is a public authority it has to run its own show, and the change-over raises staff problems. People have to go over to a new employer and old loyalties have to be broken.

Within my own experience at the Ministry of Works I have met men who have gone over to the new Authority, and have felt doubts and difficulties about going over to a new employer. It has taken time to sort out this kind of thing, but there has to be discussion with the 870 staff side before all the agreements with individual employees can be brought about. But I understand that, as my hon. Friend has said, these difficulties are now being cleared up, and that the problem looks like being solved.

My hon. Friend then raised the question of promotion, and of recruitment from outside. The policy of the Authority is that if possible it will recruit within its own organisation. If there is a man available with the necessary qualifications he will get the job; but we are dealing with an organisation which is expanding rapidly and which makes many demands upon special skills of various sorts. It is unreasonable, therefore, to suppose that the Authority can get on without recruiting qualified men from outside. It has been clearly laid down, however, and agreed with the staff that, other things being equal, the preference will be given to the man who is working with the Authority. I am advised that there is no question of redundancy arising through electric power stations being worked by the B.E.A.

The Authority's job is to act as a good employer. It has various special problems owing to the isolated nature of many of its establishments, but I think its past record has been good and we can be confident that it will act worthily in the future.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising these points, which I think were worth raising. I have answered them as best I can. My hon. Friend can be assured that my noble Friend the Lord President and I shall always be open to representations on these subjects and shall always do what lies in our power to ensure the harmony and happiness of all those who work for the Atomic Energy Authority.