HC Deb 09 July 1985 vol 82 cc887-90
6. Mr. Meadowcroft

asked the Secretary of State for Employment when he intends to reply to the report of the Employment Committee on the reinstatement of National Coal Board employees dismissed during and since the mining dispute.

8. Mr. Merlyn Rees

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the Government's response to the recommendations of the Employment Committee's report on the dismissal of National Coal Board employees.

10. Mr. Robert Hughes

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the Government's response to the recommendations of the Employment Committee's report on the dismissal of National Coal Board employees.

Mr. Tom King

I have read the report of the Select Committee on Employment. The Government are quite clear that reinstatement of the dismissed miners is entirely a matter for the National Coal Board, which is continuing to review all dismissal cases area by area and in the light of industrial tribunal findings. I understand that the NCB has made it clear that there can be no question of re-employing men who have engaged in serious violence against NCB personnel or property. The Government fully support that view.

Mr. Meadowcroft

How worried is the Secretary of State about the threats to the unity of the mining industry from the different practices carried out by different NCB areas, paralleled, alas, by the fragmentation of the National Union of Mineworkers? To what extent is he interested in assisting the mining industry by encouraging the chairman of the NCB to have a policy which does not treat people differently in different areas?

Mr. King

I know that the chairman and the board take that point seriously. Nobody should underestimate the appalling difficulties and serious nature of the problems with which they must deal. I know that in the remarkable circumstances surrounding the appalling dispute they have been anxious to deal with the problem as fairly as possible.

Mr. Rees

Is the Secretary of State worried about the evidence given in the report? Some men who were found guilty and returned to work early have kept their jobs, while others who were found not guilty but who did not return to work have lost theirs. Should there not be a right of appeal outside the NCB — a right based on natural justice — and should not the Secretary of State tell the NCB that?

Mr. King

The right hon. Gentleman knows that the matter must be the responsibility of the management of the NCB. It must deal with the problem and the dismissed miners, who have the normal procedures open to them.

Mr. Hughes

Does the Minister recollect that the cardinal principle of good industrial relations is that, after a dispute, the watchwords should be conciliation and reconciliation? Does he agree that it is outrageous that not one miner in Scotland has been reinstated — not even miners who stood trial and were acquitted? Bearing in mind some of the Secretary of State's distinguished predecessors, such as the late Lord Monckton, who was Minister of Labour, does he agree that it would be a good idea to put pressure on the NCB to adopt the modest proposals of the Select Committee on Employment and institute a proper overall review procedure?

Mr. King

A cardinal principle of all good industrial relations is always to hold a ballot before taking industrial action. I hope that that will now be firmly established. If there had been a ballot, many of these unfortunate circumstances might have been avoided. The NCB has made it clear that it is continuing to review the cases. It has reinstated significant numbers of miners, and it has looked at the cases in the light of industrial tribunal findings. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will find my answer helpful.

Mr. Gorst

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind before he replies to the Select Committee's report that the report was not about the unfair dismissal of miners, for which there is recourse to an industrial tribunal, but about allegations of unfair reinstatement of miners, for which there is no recourse to any tribunal?

Mr. King

I am somewhat surprised at my hon. Friend's question because I have here a report entitled, "The Dismissal of National Coal Board Employees".

Mr. Leighton

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Select Committee report did not consider the merits of the coal strike or violence—it in no way condoned violence — but the quite separate issue of evidence of the manifest unfairness of and glaring inconsistencies in the NCB's treatment of its dismissed employees? Is he aware that in Scotland there have been representations from chief constables and leaders of all the Churches on this matter? Is he further aware that, under repeated questioning, Mr. MacGregor refused to say that he would reinstate those miners whose cases had been upheld by industrial tribunals? In those circumstances, does he agree that the proposal for a review conducted along the lines of the ACAS code, under which each man's case could be represented, is modest? Should he not take heed of that rather than allow this wound to fester?

Mr. King

I note what the hon. Gentleman says. The report did not deal with that. I think that I am not the only right hon. or hon. Member who found it unbelievable that the Select Committee could report on this matter without once considering the appalling violence and intimidation that affected people who were not given any opportunity to say whether they wished to work. That was a grave omission.

Mr. Rowe

Does my right hon. Friend agree with half of the ordinary members of the Select Committee, who believe that it is wiser to leave reinstatement to the NCB area by area? Does he further agree that the sense of that was well demonstrated by the young man found not guilty of murdering a taxi driver nevertheless now asking for reinstatement, although he was clearly considerably engaged in the discussions about that action?

Mr. King

I have already said that these must be matters for the NCB. It has made quite clear the basis on which it will deal with such matters. It is not right to try to suggest that this is some ordinary dispute or incident. We recognise the difficult circumstances that existed. This is the right method by which to proceed. I note that rather more than 400 miners have been reinstated under the procedures operated by the NCB.

Mr. Lofthouse

In view of his office, does the right hon. Gentleman feel obliged to say whether he supports the system under which a person can face trial, be found not guilty but then be found guilty by a MacGregor kangaroo court?

Mr. King

There are times when people are dismissed although charges may not be preferred against them. It all depends on what basis the case was made. I can perfectly well understand that there might be circumstances under which people are acquitted of certain charges but are still dismissed on other grounds.

Mr. Peter Bruinvels

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the working miners of Leicester found the Select Committee report shattering and disappointing? Does he appreciate the feelings of those brave working miners, who saw property demolished, miners being intimidated and violence on the picket line? They find it incredible and unacceptable that miners should now be considered for reinstatement. That is not the way in which to run the country.

Mr. King

The working miners of Leicestershire were not alone in holding that view about the report. The Select Committee system works best when reports are unanimous. This report is clearly not unanimous, as the Committee was bitterly divided. It was not the most successful report of the Employment Select Committee.

Mr. Prescott

Is it not deplorable that the Secretary of State can have a view about a Select Committee's recommendation on procedures for the review of dismissal arising out of an industrial dispute and not give his attitude towards the principle? Since the Secretary of State has made a statement that he is considering new legislation to deal with victimisation by the trade unions of those people involved in industrial disputes, is he prepared to consider victimisation by the employers and ensure that all employers abide by the recommendations of ACAS dealing with unfair dismissal?

Mr. King

As the hon. Gentleman knows, that is already law, and there is access to industrial tribunals.

Mr. Wilson

Why will the Secretary of State not pay any attention to the questions that have been raised about the Scottish situation, where there is to be no review, where there is to be no reinstatement and where Scottish miners, some of whom have not been convicted of any offence, seem to have been singled out for discriminating treatment? Does not the Scottish situation require his immediate intervention?

Mr. King

My understanding is that the individual cases in Scotland are being reviewed on the same basis as elsewhere.