HC Deb 07 November 1967 vol 753 cc826-8
8. Mr. Woof

asked the Minister of Power which Durham collieries that would otherwise be working in the 1970s will have to close if the Seaton Carew power station is based on nuclear power rather than coal; and how many men will be redundant as a result.

34 and 35. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Minister of Power (1) what estimate has been made of closure of pits in the area covered by the Easington Parliamentary Division in the event of the Seaton Carew power station being based on nuclear energy;

(2) what estimate has been made of the number of mineworkers and other work-people in ancillary industries who would be employed in the county of Durham if the proposed Seaton Carew power station was based on coal.

Mr. Marsh

These and other issues are being taken into account in studies now proceeding in connection with the C.E.G.B.'s application for my consent to build a nuclear station. We cannot know the load factor of such a station at this stage and hon. Members will appreciate the difficulties of forecasting for many years ahead the position of individual collieries.

Mr. Woof

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it has been estimated that there would be an annual saving of only about £2 million if a nuclear power station were built at Seaton Carew? Is he further aware that this would be more than offset by the cost to the country of about £6 million as the price to pay to support those who are thrown out of work? If that concept is not correct, is my right hon. Friend prepared to swear on a stack of Bibles that there is a bright future for the Durham coalfield?

Mr. Marsh

That last request is an unreasonable one to any Minister. In reply to the first point, whatever station were built in Durham could not be in full operation until 1975. There is an argument about its cost. The Central Electricity Generating Board argues that it would have an increased operational cost of about £6 million per annum. All these factors, however, are being taken into account, and a decision will be made only after full study of them.

Mr. Shinwell

Does not my right hon. Friend begin to realise that, without furnishing an estimate of some kind, he is only aggravating the insecurity that exists among the miners? If he represented, as I do, a mining constituency, he would appreciate that the men do not know what their future is to be. It is important that we should have a firm estimate. Would it not be advisable for the Government to issue their White Paper on a national fuel and power policy as early as possible, certainly before we rise for the Christmas Recess, so that we can debate the matter and give the Government some instructions?

Mr. Marsh

I would hope that the White Paper would be out next week. It is simply not possible to give an estimate of the number of miners who will be employed at a certain colliery in six or seven years' time when one does not even know what would be the load factor of a power station which might exist at that time. This is not a question of withholding information. The information does not exist.

Mr. Swain

When this long-awaited fuel policy White Paper is produced, will there be an opportunity to debate it in the House at the earliest possible moment between the issue of the White Paper and the presentation of the Coal Bill to the House in December?

Mr. Marsh

That is not a matter for me.

Sir G. Nabarro

Is not the Minister being utterly disingenuous in this matter? Seaton Carew is a base-load power station. Does not every base-load power station in Britain operate on an 80 per cent. basis? Cannot the Minister make his calculation on all recent history of modern power stations?

Mr. Marsh

The problem here is that one is asked to give an estimate of the number of people who would be affected by a power station which would not be in full operation until something like 1975. Not having a specific power station, it is not possible to say exactly what that power station will do, what size it will be or the effects that far ahead. The important thing is that all these factors are being considered. Whatever power station were built at Seaton Carew or the Hartlepools would immediately begin to provide an average of about 900 jobs a year for people in the area.

Mr. David Watkins

Since there is a continuously growing demand for electricity, is there not room for the development of both coal and nuclear power stations? Is not the Seaton Carew power station singularly well situated for coal firing?

Mr. Marsh

Again, that could be open to argument. If one decides to site a nuclear power station on a site which meets the requirements of the Nuclear Installations Act, it does not necessarily follow that if we were to build a coal-fired station we would build it at the same place.

Mr. Manuel

Will my right hon. Friend recognise the great concern and despondency which is being created in the coalfields throughout Britain, because he is giving fairly definite figures for run-down in the industry and the number of men employed while there remain such unknown factors as the price of North Sea gas and of nuclear energy? If my right hon. Friend cannot guess those things, why is he so definite on the manpower position?

Mr. Marsh

As the White Paper will show, the cost of nuclear energy can be given. One assumes that North Sea gas is worth buying only at a price at which it is of value to the system. The rate of build-up is already established at something like 2,000 million cu. ft. a day by 1970. These figures exist. The corollary is the effect on the coal mining industry.