§ 2. Mr. Peter Morrisonasked the Secretary of State for Energy if he is satisfied that coal will continue to remain competitive against other fuels in 1976.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Energy (Mr. Alex Eadie)Yes, Sir. I expect coal to retain its general competitive position this year.
§ Mr. MorrisonDoes the Minister agree with me that the ban on overtime by the NUM is likely to make coal less competitive this year? Given that fact, what representations has he or his right hon. Friend made to the leaders of the NUM on this particular matter?
§ Mr. EadieI assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no threat to coal supplies at present. If the hon. Gentleman reflects, I think that he will agree that it would not be prudent to deal with this problem today. After all, eventually it will have to be dealt with by the unions.
§ Mr. SkinnerWith his long mining experience, does my hon. Friend appreciate that one of the reasons why the National Coal Board is able to be competitive is that among its many collieries it has some which are profitable, such as Langwith Colliery, which has made about £1 million during the last 22 months of its operations? Is not this a question of seeing not NUM leaders but the National Coal Board in order to get the Board to change its mind? It is the Board which has created this problem—people such as Sir Derek Ezra, people whose wages are paid by those who sent us here.
§ Mr. EadieIf my hon. Friend reflects, he will realise that it was my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State who arranged a meeting between the representatives of the NUM, the Chairman of the NCB and the Department of Energy. 916 I repeat that this is a matter for the unions to resolve. There is no threat to coal supplies at present.
§ Mr. Patrick McNair-WilsonDoes the Minister agree, however, that over the last two years the coal industry has enjoyed a unique opportunity in relation to its competitive position as a result of the rise in oil prices? With the increases in coal prices now announced, this headroom is in danger of disappearing. Does the Minister further agree that this is the time for everyone in the industry to recognise that high output and productivity are what the industry needs, because they will provide an opportunity not only for selling to major customers here but for developing the export trade?
§ Mr. EadieI think that what the hon. Gentleman has said is to some extent a compliment to the Department of Energy, to the extent that he has acknowledged that the policies of the present Government and the Department of Energy have given a greater stability and opportunity to the mining industry over the last two years than the industry has had for quite a time. That is a fact.
The hon. Member mentioned opportunities for coal. It is a fact that coal is cheaper than oil and that in the present financial climate this affords great advantages and great opportunities to the miners and the mining industry.
§ Mr. George GrantIs my hon. Friend aware that the national executive of the NUM could bring in an overtime ban only on a national matter? The reason that Langwith Colliery has been brought into this controversy is the 30 million tons of coal that are stocked. Will my hon. Friend, as a matter of urgency, put increased pressure on the CEGB to burn more coal?
§ Mr. EadieWhile not trying to preempt other Questions on the Order Paper, I think that within the national system there is an opportunity to burn substantial quantities of coal. I have made it clear whenever I have visited coalfields that I do not regard stocks of coal as a threat to the stability of the mining industry. I have said that coal on the ground is coal in the bank and that it will appreciate in value rather than depreciate.