Coal Industry Bill [Money] (Hansard, 18 January 1994)

HC Deb 18 January 1994 vol 235 cc805-20 805

§ Queen's Recommendation having been signified—

§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Coal Industry Bill ("the Act"), it is expedient to authorise—

§ (1) the payment out of money provided by Parliament of the following, namely—

(a) sums required by the Secretary of State for paying to the Coal Authority established by the Act amounts required by that Authority for carrying out its functions;
(b) expenses incurred by the Treasury or the Secretary of State in consequence of provision made by the Act for the acquisition of, or of rights to subscribe for, securities of successor companies;
(c) sums required by the Secretary of State for making grants to the British Coal Corporation and to successor companies which are wholly owned by the Crown;
(d) sums required by the Secretary of State for making payments for purposes connected with the supply pf concessionary coal and the payment of sums in lieu of concessionary coal;
(e) sums required by the Secretary of State for making any payment of compensation for loss of office—

(i) to a person who ceases to hold office as a chairman or member of the Corporation, or
(ii) to the person who is the chairman of the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council when it ceases to exist;

(f) sums required by the Secretary of State for making payments in pursuance of arrangements entered into by him for securing that the assets of an existing pension scheme are sufficient for meeting pension obligations arising under the scheme;
(g) administrative expenses incurred by the Secretary of State or the Treasury in consequence of the provisions of the Act;
(h) sums required by any Minister of the Crown or Government department for meeting obligations arising in consequence of that Minister or department becoming entitled or subject, in accordance with a scheme under the Act, to any property, rights or liabilities;
(i) increases attributable to the Act in the sums payable out of money so provided under any other Act;

§ (2) the extinguishment of liabilities of the British Coal Corporation in respect of—

(a) sums lent to that Corporation out of money provided by Parliament;
(b) sums which are to be taken as having been so lent; and
(c) interest in respect of any such sums;

§ (3) the issuing out of the National Loans Fund of sums required by the Secretary of State for making loans to a successor company at a time when it is wholly owned by the Crown;

§ (4) the charging on and issuing out of the Consolidated Fund of sums required by the Treasury for fulfilling such guarantees given by them for the discharge of financial obligations in connection with sums borrowed by a successor company as are given in respect of such a company at a time when it is wholly owned by the Crown.

§ In this Resolution "successor company" means any company to whom property, rights or liabilities of the British Coal Corporation or any of its wholly-owned subsidiaries are transferred in accordance with a scheme under the Act and at a time when the company is wholly owned by the Crown.—[Mr. Arbuthnot.]

10.30 pm

§ Mr. Derek Enright (Hemsworth)
One has only to read the money resolution to realise what is wrong with the privatisation of the coal industry. The Government need not look far beyond the end of their noses—if, indeed, they need to look that far.
We need to take a long-term view of our energy needs. We should not consider coal, electricity, nuclear power or gas in isolation, but should take account of our long-term 806 energy needs in their entirety. That is very far from what is suggested in the resolution. Britain requires an integrated energy policy. [Interruption.]
I was silent for a moment to give Government Front-Benchers a little time to cool down so that they can prepare themselves to listen to my important words, just in case they believe that they are able to reply to the strength of our arguments.
One of the most important questions is whether Government Front Benchers can cite any specialist from the energy world who says anything other than that, by the turn of the century, coal will once again be the main source of energy. Even if they cannot do so, the fact remains that the resolution would mean the running down of our coal resources. In other words, by the turn of the century we shall have made ourselves utterly dependent on foreign resources for our energy needs.
Such a situation is dangerous but not untypical of what is happening at the moment, or of the Government's policy. It is why, for example, we lost the race for the European bank. We lost the race because of our absurdities and our ridiculous posture on Maastricht. We also lost because London is a short-term financial sector, whereas Frankfurt has always made it clear that it is a long-term financial centre. Our continental partners rightly chose Frankfurt as the location for the bank, and their decision was important. That is not merely symbolic but at the heart of the Government's failure to take this country into the next century.
As many of my hon. Friends want to speak, I will briefly examine different aspects of Government policy. The gas industry was most unwilling to provide the electricity supply industry. That was the last thing it wanted, but it was prepared to make that provision at what it said was a commercial price. I thought that we had freed gas to operate in the marketplace, but a money resolution made the gas industry sell its product below the market price.
The money resolution before the House will sell off the coal industry to a company with remarkably limited objectives, which cannot possibly pursue what is really needed in energy policy.

§ Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley)
One problem with private coal mines is that they can rarely restore the environment properly at the end of their operations. Does my hon. Friend believe that the money resolution makes adequate provision to ensure adequate environmental restoration to British Coal standards?

§ Mr. Enright
That would be possible, if the motion contained a single enabling factor giving the companies the money and powers to restore clapped-out coal mines—of which there are many in my constituency—to their previous state.
The resolution provides no guarantee in respect of small social factors that still count in the local environment. It takes no account, for example, of the Coal Industry Social Welfare Organisation. The senior and junior Frickley bands really go back to basics, to coin a phrase. Those institutions take young people off the streets and give them something worth while to do, education and culture, and are enduring. I think also of Frickley Amateur Athletic, which is at the heart of football in that area.
How much money would be needed to keep two bands going? Remarkably little. I am sorry that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is not present. I also expected his 807 Parliamentary Private Secretary—the hon. Member for City of Chester (Mr. Brandreth)—to be present in support of his boss. The hon. Member of City of Chester had enough money given to his company, Unicorn Heritage, to support a football team and two bands into the next century.

§ Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes)
Order. The hon. Gentleman must not try my patience too much. The money resolution does not go as wide as the hon. Gentleman might want, and I ask him to confine his remarks to the motion.

§ Mr. Enright
My complaint is that the money resolution does not cater for functions previously performed by British Coal in respect of bands, football teams, athletics, social welfare and pensions. It was apparently very easy for another Department to provide money that could be thrown down the drain and allow companies to go bankrupt. That money would have enabled two bands and one football team to continue for not 50 but 250 years, on the basis of the average amount that is currently given by British Coal as subvention, and should be given by the new body that is being established.
It is scandalous that two hon. Members who are so closely associated with the motion do not see fit to give that money to my people in Frickley, who have suffered directly as a result of the Bill and the motion. There is no doubt that people in South Elmsall, South Kirby, Hemsworth, Featherstone and Havercroft have suffered particularly from the restrictions imposed by the inadequate creature that we are discussing.
I feel very strongly about what the Government are doing. In their rush towards a crazed nationalisation that they have not justified—I appreciate that I cannot discuss it on this motion—they have taken no account of the lives that they have tossed aside, especially in constituencies such as mine. The smirking of public school Conservative Members is intolerable. I am not referring to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Technology; I applaud his jolly nice secondary modern-school background. I am referring to the Minister for Energy, whose school motto is "Manners makyth man".

§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)
May we have that in Latin?

§ Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East)
Or Greek.

§ Mr. Enright
"Manners makyth man" is the actual wording of the motto. It does not translate into Latin or Greek; it is the creation of a good and eminent English writer.
The Minister displayed none of the virtues associated with "Manners makyth man". It means consideration for ordinary people—not just those who can take the money and make the profit, which is what the motion is all about, with no thought of protecting the five sites in my constituency—the only five green field sites—that will be opencast. Following the erection of the filthy muckstacks, we now have the craters; but we do not even have the consolation of seeing moon men land on them. We may have the consolation of seeing the junior Minister open those sites, but I warn him that that would be a dangerous task to undertake.
Another important aspect has not been dealt with properly. I refer to the scientific research undertaken by British Coal. It was very successful, relying on a tradition 808 going back to Dr. Bronowski—who, although much maligned by the Daily Express, did superb work for British Coal very early on. The work on clean-coal technology, particularly that done at Grimethorpe, was a wonder, marvelled at by the rest of the world. The rest of the world bought it, and was grateful for it. What mention is it given in the motion? None at all.
There is a simple reason. British Coal closed down Grimethorpe. The reason why Grimethorpe was closed down was simple: it was successful. It was going to show how one could use coal effectively and cleanly. That technology was thrown away. The people who will benefit are the Swedes and the French. That shows precisely why we cannot trust energy policy to the Government, and why this pathetic creature that is called a money resolution will not and should not survive. It should be beaten. I urge the House to throw it out as the puny creature that it is.

10.44 pm

§ Mr. Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough)
It is always a pleasure, even a joy, to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright). We felt at one stage that he was about to use a Latin phrase when he said, "Manners makyth man". When he was describing the Minister of State, I thought that he was going to say, "Profits makyth man" because to the Government profits are more important than manners. We have got used to that over the years.
I am glad to say that my hon. Friend excluded the Under-Secretary from the accusation of having a public school background. We all looked at my hon. Friend aghast, if that is the right word, when he seemed about to suggest that the former miner about whom we have heard so much, who has come such a long way from the Back Benches to the Front Benches and who will take the Bill through Committee, went to public school. My hon. Friend the Member for Hemsworth pulled back and listed him as a former pupil of a secondary modern. I can feel a little superior, having gone to a grammar school; I got through the 11-plus.
I shall come back to the money resolution, Madam Deputy Speaker. I know that it pleases your heart enormously that we stay on the script, the programme and the resolution before us.
We heard a lot today from the President of the Board of Trade in the first instance about a £20,000 million investment in the coal industry since 1979. Our figures alshow £12,000 million investment in deep mining since 1974. The hon. Member for Bedfordshire, North (Sir T. Skeet) said in an intervention that £8,000 million of that had gone into machinery. The question was asked in a sedentary intervention on our side how much of that had gone into redundancy. How much of that money was not investment but redundancy money to pay off the miners, get them out of the pits and soften up the industry?
When the President of the Board of Trade referred to the figure of £20,000 million, my hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Cummings) intervened to ask how, if that investment had been made in the coal mining industry, the Government could walk away from collieries and leave them in a state of desuetude—if, unlike my hon. Friend the Member for Hemsworth, I may use a word that comes from the Latin. How could they leave them to flood? How could they invest so much money in plant and machinery arid walk away from it?
809 The money resolution, the financial obligations in the resolution and the financial memorandum, which is part of the Bill, are not about money. They are about ideology. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), who was so highly praised by Lord Lawson in his autobiography—Lord Lawson enjoyed his interventions —was right to say that the Bill and the money resolution are more to do with ideology than money.
If we were debating tonight the sale of British Petroleum shares, to add to the Government's piggy bank, we could say at least that there was merit in the Bill. If we were debating the sale of other assets of the state which Lord Stockton, to whom the Minister of State referred, called the family heirlooms or jewels—assets that would bring money into the coffers of the state and reduce the public sector borrowing requirement, we could say that at least there was merit in the Bill. There is no merit in the Bill or the money resolution, because the legislation is ideological.
The President of the Board of Trade said that privatisation of the coal industry was in the manifesto, and that the Government had a mandate for it. What we say is this: we had a mandate in 1945 and nothing has given this, or any, Conservative Government the right to reverse the mandates of previous Governments and take us back to a past that we heard about from my hon. Friends. The Minister does not need to grimace. He can intervene later if he wishes.
The mandate that the Government are trying to reverse is our mandate from many years ago, and they are doing so on ideological grounds. The financial memorandum to the Bill mentions the sum of about £70 million in respect to concessionary fuel for former British Coal employees. We believe that the figure should be £150 million.
On pensions, the memorandum states: The capital values of these liabilities are not expected to exceed £400 million and £45 million respectively. A whole host of financial obligations will reduce the impact of the privatisation and show that the Bill is ideologically and politically correct from the Government's point of view, but has no merit in financial terms.
The money resolution is part of the sham of the Bill, which has nothing to do with raising money.

§ Mr. Peter Hardy (Wentworth)
Before my hon. Friend concludes, will he look at paragraph (4) of the resolution regarding the sums required for the purposes of providing a pension guarantee? My hon. Friend is probably more of an expert than I in that area.
If there is an average retail price index of 4 or 4.5 per cent., in five out of every six years the pension fund could be expected to provide a surplus far in excess of the RPI. We have heard little from the Government today, or in the preceding weeks, but they are minded to take half the surplus of the pension fund. If that is the case, will my hon. Friend invite the Minister to tell us what the Government expect sub-paragraph (f) to cost and what they expect to get from their share of the miners pension fund during the next 10 or 12 years?

§ Mr. Bell
I thank my hon. Friend for intervening in that way. I and other hon. Members in the House appreciated his moving account of the vesting day of 1947 when he gave his first speech, as I also remember that day. We 810 remember the great relief felt throughout the mining communities that the coal owners had gone. There was a blue flag on the masthead of our colliery and a cartoon at the time said, "Never come back." That message was directed to the coal owners. Opposition spokesmen stand at this Dispatch Box today with some sadness, with Members of Parliament for mining constituencies all around us, knowing that the coal owners will come back.
The President of the Board of Trade said that nationalisation had been a failure. It was Conservative Governments' refusal to accept it and to change the management of British Coal—in some cases, their activities were worse than the coal owners of old—that was the failure. That conspiracy between the National Coal Board, as it was then, and Conservative Governments has undone the mining industry.
To respond to my hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy), that matter is a part of my speech. The financial memorandum contains this phrase: The Bill provides, in return for the guarantee, for surplus assets in the modified schemes to be available to the Secretary of State"— who is acting in the guise of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Treasury.
The President of the Board of Trade and the Minister, when he summed up, referred to the interests of taxpayers, but they have no interest in pension funds that were built up by mine workers over many years. We shall point that out in Committee, as we have done on the Floor of the House.
I know that other colleagues want to speak in the debate, which is important, so I shall be brief. The money resolution touches on many issues. I referred to pensions, and we have spoken to the trustees of the pension funds, who are not entirely happy with the Government's approach. They are also not entirely happy that the Minister wishes to appoint and dismiss members of the board and to handle the fund's surplus.
The Minister of State, in his usual glib fashion, was saying from the Dispatch Box that there would be all types of guarantees for people in the pension fund; there would be index-linked pensions and guarantees. Then he mentioned a 50:50 split of the surplus. We shall examine those matters carefully as we go along, when we consider the financial memorandum and the money resolution before the House.
Many of our colleagues spoke about water from the mines, especially in the north-east of England—the environmental liabilities. Where are the environmental liabilities in the money resolution and the financial memorandum? We shall consider that serious—as we see it—issue of pollution in the north, and the complications that that will pose for the privatisation of the industry. That is another subject to which we shall return with the Minister—I understand that he will serve on the Committee with us and that he will work with us in Committee.
Concessionary coal has also been mentioned. I mentioned earlier the reference in the financial memorandum to the sum of £70 million. We believe that £150 million is involved, and we say that the current proposals on the table fall short of providing concessionaries with security in their entitlement to concessionary fuel and cash in lieu. We shall return to that and the lack of 811 protection, as we see it, for the entitlement of workers who are currently employed in the industry. That worries us; it will worry the Committee, and we will take that forward.
We have also heard about the Coal Industry Social Welfare Organisation—CISWO. The interesting thing about CISWO is that the Minister did not quite know how to pronounce it. There was a great difficulty in the pronounciation. As my hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) says, it is pronounced "Siswo", not "Kiswo". We could have a lot of discussion about that. Nevertheless, it is a major subject that we shall consider.
We say that the Bill as a whole, with the money resolution, should seek to continue the work of CISWO and ensure that it is adequately funded. As yet, as we see it, there are no satisfactory proposals which would give CISWO or a successor organisation a secure enough future with adequate funding.
So the Minister can see—I am glad that he will be on the Committee—that, as we wend our way through the money resolution and through ways and means, and as we get through the Bill and into Committee, there will be enough sustenance for us. There will be enough fears to allay of pensioners, of people who receive concessionary fuel and of people who are worried about environmental liabilities.
We promise, not a long hot summer for the Minister, but a chilly, lengthy winter.

10.57 pm

§ Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth)
I shall make a short contribution to the debate.

§ Mr. Eric Illsley (Barnsley, Central)
More!

§ Mr. Dickens
No; I shall not go on all night.
The money resolution is central to the privatisation of the coal industry. One has to ask oneself why the coal industry needs to be privatised. If one thinks back to the days when the coal mining industry was nationalised, one has to remember that there were about 1,000 coal mines in the United Kingdom. Year after year, closure has followed closure. It is common knowledge that Lord Robens and the former Secretary of State for Energy, the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn), closed about one coal mine every 10 days. The right hon. Gentleman was Secretary of State for Energy for the Labour party: we must not forget that.
We must not sit on the Conservative Benches taking lessons on why we should do this and why we should do that, without fighting back a little and reminding the coal mining industry why we need the money resolution. We need the resolution because, if we are to save the coal mining industry—hon. Members should remember that, even in the state in which it is today, it is still one of the largest coal mining industries in the world, and it will remain as such—we still need to safeguard the work force with a money resolution.
The successor companies must have the wherewithal to safeguard pension funds and to ensure that the obligations are met, so that miners receive their proper pensions, whoever owns the coal mines. We have to ensure that the concessionary fuel that mining families have enjoyed over the years is still paid to those families, or money in lieu. That is why the money resolution is central to the Bill. If they want to save the mining industry, the Opposition should not vote against it, or make difficulties in 812 Committee. It is through the money resolution and in Committee that we shall safeguard the welfare of the work force in the mines.
It may surprise Labour Members to know that I come from mining stock. I had relatives down the Ripley and the Alfreton mines, in Derbyshire. I do not need lectures from the Opposition about the interests of the coal mining industry, because I speak for my own flesh and blood. No, I did not go to university, either. I went to a secondary modern school, and I am quite proud of it, although I also wish that I had had a university education, because I know that the lack of it shows at times—although not so clearly as it shows every day of the week in Labour Members.
The money resolution is central. We must ensure the continuation of the mining industry, because we must have a mix of fuel. The hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright) talked about an energy policy, and we need oil, gas, nuclear power and coal—one could put those fuels in the reverse order if one liked. Never again must the United Kingdom be held to ransom by a year-long miners' strike that threatens to put out the lights and stop companies from running. Never again must we be placed in that position.

§ Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes)
Order. Before the hon. Gentleman takes off too far, I remind him that we are dealing with a money resolution. I should be grateful if he would return to that topic.

§ Mr. Dickens
I am grateful to you for having drawn that to my attention, Madam Deputy Speaker. You are right. Just by chance, I was about to finish my speech, because I know how many Labour Members want to speak.

§ Mr. Illsley
Has not the hon. Gentleman just let the cat out of the bag with his reference to the 1984 miners' strike? Obviously he intended to go on to refer to the 1974 strike, too. Is it not true that the privatisation of coal is related to those strikes, in that it is a way of getting back at the mining unions in revenge for those strikes, especially that of 1974?

§ Mr. Dickens
The hon. Gentleman probably knows more about that question than I do, because in earlier days he was an adviser to Arthur Scargill in Barnsley.

§ Mr. Enright
And a very good one, too. It was when Arthur Scargill lost my hon. Friend that he went astray.

§ Mr. Dickens
I am trying to be brief, but clearly Opposition Members are enjoying my contribution.
To answer the question asked by the hon. Member for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley), we are privatising the coal industry for one reason alone. Whatever party is in power, politicians, in the form of the Department of Trade and Industry, are the worst people to help run industry. The sooner we get politicians off the back of industry the better. The DTI has done a reasonable job until now, but I am sure that private industry will do a good job in one respect.
The mining industry is in a mess today because of its pitiful marketing of coal. It is no good digging coal if one cannot sell it. Private industry, with its management techniques and marketing skills, is far better able to market coal across Europe and to provide the coal mining industry with a future. As I finish my speech, all that I ask Labour Members to remember is that the future of the United Kingdom coal mining industry is in their hands today. If they want a future, they must allow it to carry on.

813

§ Madam Deputy Speaker
Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman's peroration, but it is not relevant.

§ 11.3 pm

§ Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East)
It would be useful if, when hon. Members discussed the money resolution, they showed some sign of having read it. It is a funny old money resolution, because in some ways it says too much and is too open ended, yet in other ways it says too little.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright) pointed out some of the omissions in the motion, perhaps I ought to illustrate some of the ways in which the motion opens issues up too much and how they should be defined more clearly. It has been talked about it as a funny old money motion. A lot of funny old money is likely to be made out of the privatisation of mining, because the country has massive coal reserves. We are blocking off certain coal reserves off the Durham coast, but otherwise the coal reserves of deep-mined coal will remain underground for a future of opencast development.
If we shift pricing policy and alter the fuel market, vast amounts of profit will be made from the coal mining industry.

§ Mr. Jimmy Hood (Clydesdale)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I bring to your attention the conference being held in the corner, which is distracting me? I cannot hear what my hon. Friend is saying.

§ Madam Deputy Speaker
I am sure that that point will be well taken.

§ Mr. Barnes
The point might have been well taken if it had been heard by the people responsible.
There is a great deal of money to be made out of coal in the country, despite the fact that we are now considering the privatisation of a relatively small industry, which has been allowed to shrink considerably. Nevertheless, there are massive coal reserves, from the Leeds area to Nottingham and Derby, cutting through my constituency, to be obtained by opencast methods. Whether it is in a former mining area or in areas which were mined in the past century, almost any piece of land that has not been built on will become open to that potential.
There is something missing to enable our consideration of the money motion. Nothing in the motion or the Bill tells us what size the coal industry will be after privatisation. We should have figures that are relevant to its size, because of the open-ended provisions in the motion. The motion outlines the Coal Authority's rights of acquisition, its rights of obtaining security, the operations of successor companies, and the compensation to people being moved from positions on the board. However, for us to be able to make some assessment of all that, we should be able to understand what is being proposed and planned for the future of the industry. It is a peculiar motion.
Even if Opposition Members accept that we have lost the Second Reading, that measures are to go into Committee, and even in the light of the fact that the money resolution is attached to that Bill, it has massive shortcomings. The motion should be rejected on its own demerits, as well as on the demerits of its being part and parcel of a Bill which is anti-social and will kill off the coal industry in Derbyshire, in Durham and in many other parts of the country.

814

§ Mr. Hood
My hon. Friend is making an important point. I am pleased to see that the President of the Board of Trade has joined us as we come to the end of discussing the money resolution. Perhaps he can tell us what paragraph 1(e)(i) means, which uses the words: to a person who ceases to hold office as a chairman or member of the corporation". Is it not the responsibility of the President of the Board of Trade to tell the House what sums of money are involved in that so-called compensation?
How much are we talking about? Neil Clarke has been as good to the coal industry as Rachman was to housing policy in Westminster city council. Now we have a provision that will pay him hundreds of thousands of pounds in compensation. The President of the Board of Trade should say exactly how much we are going to use to pay off the chairman, who has ruined the coal industry, as a backhander for his services.

§ Mr. Barnes
I agree. If we consider paragraph (1)(a) to (i), we will find similar questions to ask.
It is interesting that the Minister has not sought to speak. He could have jumped up at the beginning of the debate and explained what the missing points are about. Ideally, there should not be missing points. We should be able to read the motion, see the detail and the implications involved, and do our own accountancy in order to make up our minds before we vote.
In the absence of that, and in a very short time, the Minister should explain exactly what the motion is about. He should also take up the points that were made on Second Reading about the environment, safety and so on, and tell us how they relate to the measure and whether our concerns will be answered by the resolution.

11.10 pm

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Technology (Mr. Patrick McLoughlin)
In some respects, this has been a rather amusing debate. The hon. Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) told us that, because the Labour party nationalised the coal industry in 1947 and it was in its election manifesto, and therefore a mandate, we should not seek to change it. I take a little more comfort from a more recent document, the previous Conservative manifesto, which said that we would privatise British Coal. That commitment has far more standing than one given in 1945.

§ Mr. Hood
As we are discussing manifestos, would the Minister like to tell us about his party's commitment not to increase taxes?

§ Mr. McLoughlin
That point has been perfectly covered on numerous occasions. I am speaking to the motion and about a certain commitment about which I was asked tonight.
The hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright), in a most incredible speech, almost accused me of having gone to a public school. That has never happened to me before. He asked for an assurance that the bands in his constituency will be around for the next 250 years. Not many politicians—not even the hon. Gentleman—would make a commitment relating to the next 250 years. That was a strange request. It shows the farce which the debate has come to.

§ Mr. Enright
I did indeed do that. I shall give the precise figures. The mover of the motion has a 815 Parliamentary Private Secretary who took enough money out of the Government to subsidise, for 250 years at current prices, the shortfall for the two bands of Frickley and Frickley Athletic. It was a simple mathematical point that I was making.

§ Mr. McLoughlin
That is a spurious point, and the hon. Gentleman knows it. If that is his argument, it just shows how devoid the Opposition are of sensible arguments on the issue.
I was asked several questions about concessionary fuel by the hon. Member for Middlesbrough. That is a matter in which I have a particular interest. My mother has been receiving concessionary fuel as the beneficiary of my father, who worked in the coal industry for 30 years. Concessionary fuel and the rights and entitlements of beneficiaries are very important.
Yesterday, in announcing our conclusions on the consultation paper, my hon. Friend the Minister of State made the Government's position clear. If Labour Members vote against this resolution, they will be voting against the Government having the opportunity to provide the funds for concessionary coal.

§ Mr. Michael Clapham (Barnsley, West and Penistone)
rose—

§ Mr. McLoughlin
I am sorry—I have literally a couple of minutes left. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will find time to come back to this point.
As we have seen from the exchanges tonight, it is an important matter which undoubtedly will be debated in Committee. I have made my position clear on the importance of that subject. Clearly, if Labour Members vote against this money resolution, they will be voting against the provision of concessionary coal—

§ It being three-quarters of an hour after the commencement of proceedings on the motion, MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER put the Question, pursuant to Standing Order No. 14 (Exempted business).

§ The House divided: Ayes 304, Noes 122.

818

Division No. 76]	[11.15 pm
AYES
Ainsworth, Peter (East Surrey)	Boswell, Tim
Aitken, Jonathan	Bottomley, Rt Hon Virginia
Alexander, Richard	Bowden, Andrew
Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby)	Bowis, John
Allason, Rupert (Torbay)	Boyson, Rt Hon Sir Rhodes
Amess, David	Brandreth, Gyles
Arbuthnot, James	Brazier, Julian
Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)	Bright, Graham
Arnold, Sir Thomas (Hazel Grv)	Brooke, Rt Hon Peter
Ashby, David	Brown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thorpes)
Aspinwall, Jack	Browning, Mrs. Angela
Atkins, Robert	Bruce, Ian (S Dorset)
Atkinson, David (Bour'mouth E)	Budgen, Nicholas
Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)	Burns, Simon
Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)	Butler, Peter
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)	Butterfill, John
Baldry, Tony	Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)
Banks, Matthew (Southport)	Carlile, Alexander (Montgomry)
Banks, Robert (Harrogate)	Carlisle, John (Luton North)
Bates, Michael	Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
Batiste, Spencer	Carrington, Matthew
Berth, Rt Hon A. J.	Carttiss, Michael
Bellingham, Henry	Cash, William
Berestord, Sir Paul	Channon, Rt Hon Paul
Biffen, Rt Hon John	Chapman, Sydney
Blackburn, Dr John G.	Churchill, Mr
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas	Clappison, James
Booth, Hartley	Clarke, Rt Hon Kenneth (Ruclif)

816

Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey	Howard, Rt Hon Michael
Coe, Sebastian	Howarth, Alan (Strat'rd-on-A)
Colvin, Michael	Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)
Congdon, David	Howell, Sir Ralph (N Norfolk)
Conway, Derek	Hughes Robert G. (Harrow W)
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre For'st)	Hughes, Simon (Southwark)
Coombs, Simon (Swindon)	Hunt, Rt Hon David (Wirral W)
Cope, Rt Hon Sir John	Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)
Couchman, James	Hunter, Andrew
Cran, James	Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas
Currie, Mrs Edwina (S D'by'ire)	Jack, Michael
Curry, David (Skipton & Ripon)	Jackson, Robert (Wantage)
Davies, Quentin (Stamford)	Jenkin, Bernard
Day, Stephen	Jessel, Toby
Deva, Nirj Joseph	Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey
Devlin, Tim	Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
Dickens, Geoffrey	Jones, Nigel (Cheltenham)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James	Jones, Robert B. (W Hertfdshr)
Dover, Den	Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine
Duncan, Alan	Key, Robert
Duncan-Smith, Iain	Kilfedder, Sir James
Durant, Sir Anthony	King, Rt Hon Tom
Dykes, Hugh	Kirkhope, Timothy
Eggar, Tim	Knapman, Roger
Elletson, Harold	Knight, Mrs Angela (Erewash)
Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter	Knight, Greg (Derby N)
Evans, David (Welwyn Hatfield)	Knight, Dame Jill (Bir'm E'st'n)
Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)	Knox, Sir David
Evans, Nigel (Ribble Valley)	Kynoch, George (Kincardine)
Evans, Roger (Monmouth)	Lait, Mrs Jacqui
Evennett, David	Lang, Rt Hon Ian
Faber, David	Lawrence, Sir Ivan
Fabricant, Michael	Legg, Barry
Fenner, Dame Peggy	Leigh, Edward
Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)	Lennox-Boyd, Mark
Fishburn, Dudley	Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)
Forman, Nigel	Lidington, David
Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)	Lloyd, Rt Hon Peter (Fareham)
Forth, Eric	Luff, Peter
Foster, Don (Bath)	Lynne, Ms Liz
Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman	MacGregor, Rt Hon John
Fox, Dr Liam (Woodspring)	Maclean, David
Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley)	McLoughlin, Patrick
Freeman, Rt Hon Roger	McNair-Wilson, Sir Patrick
French, Douglas	Maddock, Mrs Diana
Fry, Sir Peter	Madel, Sir David
Gale, Roger	Maitland, Lady Olga
Gallie, Phil	Malone, Gerald
Gardiner, Sir George	Mans, Keith
Garnier, Edward	Marland, Paul
Gill, Christopher	Marlow, Tony
Gillan, Cheryl	Marshall, John (Hendon S)
Goodlad, Rt Hon Alastair	Marshall, Sir Michael (Arundel)
Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles	Martin, David (Portsmouth S)
Gorman, Mrs Teresa	Mates, Michael
Gorst, John	Mawhinney, Rt Hon Dr Brian
Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)	Mellor, Rt Hon David
Greenway, John (Ryedale)	Merchant, Piers
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N)	Milligan, Stephen
Grylls, Sir Michael	Mills, Iain
Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn	Moate, Sir Roger
Hague, William	Monro, Sir Hector
Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archie	Montgomery, Sir Fergus
Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)	Moss, Malcolm
Hampson, Dr Keith	Needham, Richard
Hanley, Jeremy	Neubert, Sir Michael
Hargreaves, Andrew	Newton, Rt Hon Tony
Harris, David	Nicholls, Patrick
Harvey, Nick	Nicholson, David (Taunton)
Haselhurst, Alan	Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)
Hawkins, Nick	Norris, Steve
Hawksley, Warren	Onslow, Rt Hon Sir Cranley
Heald, Oliver	Oppenheim, Phillip
Heathcoat-Amory, David	Ottaway, Richard
Hendry, Charles	Page, Richard
Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael	Paice, James
Higgins, Rt Hon Sir Terence L.	Patnick, Irvine
Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas (G'tham)	Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey
Horam, John	Pawsey, James
Hordern, Rt Hon Sir Peter	Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

817

Pickles, Eric	Sumberg, David
Porter, Barry (Wirral S)	Sweeney, Walter
Portillo, Rt Hon Michael	Sykes, John
Powell, William (Corby)	Taylor, Ian (Esher)
Rathbone, Tim	Taylor, Matthew (Truro)
Redwood, Rt Hon John	Taylor, Sir Teddy (Southend, E)
Rendel, David	Temple-Morris, Peter
Renton, Rt Hon Tim	Thomason, Roy
Richards, Rod	Thompson, Sir Donald (C'er V)
Riddick, Graham	Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)
Rifkind, Rt Hon. Malcolm	Thurnham, Peter
Robathan, Andrew	Townend, John (Bridlington)
Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn	Townsend, Cyril D. (Bexl'yh'th)
Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S)	Tracey, Richard
Robinson, Mark (Somerton)	Tredinnick, David
Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne)	Trend, Michael
Rowe, Andrew (Mid Kent)	Trotter, Neville
Rumbold, Rt Hon Dame Angela	Twinn, Dr Ian
Ryder, Rt Hon Richard	Tyler, Paul
Sackville, Tom	Vaughan, Sir Gerard
Sainsbury, Rt Hon Tim	Viggers, Peter
Shaw, David (Dover)	Waldegrave, Rt Hon William
Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)	Walden, George
Shephard, Rt Hon Gillian	Waller, Gary
Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)	Ward, John
Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)	Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)
Shersby, Michael	Waterson, Nigel
Sims, Roger	Watts, John
Skeet, Sir Trevor	Wells, Bowen
Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)	Wheeler, Rt Hon Sir John
Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)	Whitney, Ray
Soames, Nicholas	Whittingdale, John
Spencer, Sir Derek	Widdecombe, Ann
Spicer, Sir James (W Dorset)	Wiggin, Sir Jerry
Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)	Wilkinson, John
Spink, Dr Robert	Willetts, David
Spring, Richard	Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton)
Sproat, Iain	Winterton, Nicholas (Macc'f'ld)
Squire, Robin (Hornchurch)	Wolfson, Mark
Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John	Wood, Timothy
Steel, Rt Hon Sir David	Yeo, Tim
Steen, Anthony	Young, Rt Hon Sir George
Stephen, Michael
Stern, Michael	Tellers for the Ayes:
Stewart, Allan	Mr. Andrew Mackay and Mr. Andrew Mitchell.
Streeter, Gary

NOES
Abbott, Ms Diane	Dowd, Jim
Adams, Mrs Irene	Enright, Derek
Ainsworth, Robert (Cov'try NE)	Fatchett, Derek
Anderson, Ms Janet (Ros'dale)	Foster, Rt Hon Derek
Armstrong, Hilary	Foulkes, George
Barnes, Harry	Fyfe, Maria
Battle, John	Galbraith, Sam
Beckett, Rt Hon Margaret	Gerrard, Neil
Bell, Stuart	Godman, Dr Norman A.
Betts, Clive	Godsiff, Roger
Bradley, Keith	Graham, Thomas
Brown, Gordon (Dunfermline E)	Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)
Brown, N. (N'c'tle upon Tyne E)	Hall, Mike
Campbell-Savours, D. N.	Hanson, David
Cann, Jamie	Hardy, Peter
Chisholm, Malcolm	Heppell, John
Clarke, Eric (Midlothian)	Hill, Keith (Streatham)
Clelland, David	Home Robertson, John
Clwyd, Mrs Ann	Hood, Jimmy
Cohen, Harry	Howarth, George (Knowsley N)
Corbyn, Jeremy	Hoyle, Doug
Cousins, Jim	Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)
Cryer, Bob	Hutton, John
Cunliffe, Lawrence	Illsley, Eric
Cunningham, Jim (Covy SE)	Ingram, Adam
Dafis, Cynog	Jackson, Helen (Shef'ld, H)
Darting, Alistair	Jones, leuan Wyn (Ynys Môn)
Davidson, Ian	Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C)
Davis, Terry (B'ham, H'dge H'l)	Jones, Martyn (Clwyd, SW)
Denham, John	Kennedy, Charles (Ross,C&S)
Dixon, Don	Kennedy, Jane (Lpool Brdgn)
Donohoe, Brian H.	Kilfoyle, Peter

818

Leighton, Ron	Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lew'm E)
Lewis, Terry	Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)
Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)	Primarolo, Dawn
Llwyd, Elfyn	Raynsford, Nick
Macdonald, Calum	Roche, Mrs. Barbara
McFall, John	Short, Clare
Mackinlay, Andrew	Simpson, Alan
McMaster, Gordon	Skinner, Dennis
McNamara, Kevin	Smith, Rt Hon John (M'kl'ds E)
McWilliam, John	Snape, Peter
Mahon, Alice	Spearing, Nigel
Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)	Spellar, John
Martlew, Eric	Steinberg, Gerry
Meale, Alan	Stott, Roger
Michael, Alun	Strang, Dr. Gavin
Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)	Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)
Milburn, Alan	Tipping, Paddy
Miller, Andrew	Turner, Dennis
Moonie, Dr Lewis	Vaz, Keith
Morgan, Rhodri	Walker, Rt Hon Sir Harold
Morley, Elliot	Wareing, Robert N
Mowlam, Marjorie	Watson, Mike
Murphy, Paul	Wigley, Dafydd
O'Brien, Michael (N W'kshire)	Wilson, Brian
Olner, William	Wise, Audrey
O'Neill, Martin	Worthington, Tony
Patchett, Terry	Wray, Jimmy
Pickthall, Colin
Pike, Peter L.	Tellers for the Ayes:
Pope, Greg	Mr. Michael Clapham and Mr. Bill Etherington.
Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

§ Question accordingly agreed to.

§ Resolved, That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Coal Industry Bill ("the Act"), it is expedient to authorize—

§ (1) the payment out of money provided by Parliament of the following, namely—

(a) sums required by the Secretary of State for paying to the Coal Authority established by the Act amounts required by that Authority for carrying out its functions;
(b) expenses incurred by the Treasury or the Secretary of State in consequence of provision made by the Act for the acquisition of, or of rights to subscribe for, securities of successor companies;
(c) sums required by the Secretary of State for making grants to the British Coal Corporation and to successor companies which are wholly owned by the Crown;
(d) sums required by the Secretary of State for making payments for purposes connected with the supply of concessionary coal and the payment of sums in lieu of concessionary coal;
(e) sums required by the Secretary of State for making any payment of compensation for loss of office—

(i) to a person who ceases to hold office as a chairman or member of the Corporation, or
(ii) to the person who is the chairman of the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council when it ceases to exist;

(f) sums required by the Secretary of State for making payments in pursuance of arrangements entered into by him for securing that the assets of an existing pension scheme are sufficient for meeting pension obligations arising under the scheme;
(g) administrative expenses incurred by the Secretary of State or the Treasury in consequence of the provisions of the Act;
(h) sums required by any Minister of the Crown or Government department for meeting obligations arising in consequence of that Minister or department becoming entitled or subject, in accordance with a scheme under the Act, to any property, rights or liabilities;
(i) increases attributable to the Act in the sums payable out of money so provided under any other Act;

§ (2) the extinguishment of liabilities of the British Coal Corporation in respect of—

(a) sums lent to that Corporation out of money provided by Parliament;
(b) sums which are to be taken as having been so lent; and
(c) interest in respect of any such sums;

§ (3) the issuing out of the National Loans Fund of sums required by the Secretary of State for making loans to a successor company at a time when it is wholly owned by the Crown;