§ 3.9 p.m.
§ Lord DiamondMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans have they for setting up a National Coal Board subsidiary company with the responsibility of creating jobs in areas threatened by pit closures.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Energy (The Earl of Avon)My Lords, there have been no compulsory redundancies in the coal industry during the current restructuring. With the early retirement provisions for the over-50s and the generous redundancy payments now available for the under-50s it is not envisaged that any compulsory redundancies will be required to achieve the proposed 10 per cent. fall in the manpower of the National Coal Board over the next 12 months.
§ Lord DiamondMy Lords, I am grateful for that Answer, but the noble Earl must be reading an Order Paper different from mine. I cannot find a single reference to the words "compulsory redundancies". What is assumed behind the Question—at least, what I assumed would be understood—is the possibility of people losing jobs compulsorily or voluntarily. Inasmuch as a comparison with steel proves that it is quite useful to have a separate subsidiary organisation trying to provide jobs where they are being lost, would it not be sensible for the Coal Board to be doing something similar and for the Government to be encouraging it to do so?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I am sorry that the noble Lord did not read into my origial reply an anticipation of his supplementary question. Really, the two situations are quite different. There is, for instance, nothing new in pit closures. We talked about this last Friday. So far as comparisons with steel are concerned, the NCB has so far been able to avoid compulsory redundancies. Any coal industry equivalent of the British Steel plan would have to operate in many more locations and therefore be less effective.
§ Lord BlytonMy Lords, is the Minister aware that I have seen in my lifetime in County Durham collieries closed, villages devastated and young people left without jobs? If we are to face closures again, should not something be done to create new industries in the places where closures are to take place rather than leave children and young miners without hope in derelict villages?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, indeed; but what the noble Lord perhaps does not appreciate is the number 546 of alternative jobs that have been provided for these miners and the fact that until recently no one declared redundant has been under the age of 50.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, in view of the importance of the question asked by my noble friend Lord Blyton, is it really understood that in modern mining the word "miner" embraces many professions and many skills—carpenters, joiners and engineers? It is quite a remarkable range. They have skills and abilities that could be used in other industries. Does the noble Earl not agree with the noble Lord, Lord Diamond, that when pit closures affecting entire communities are likely, new industries could be attracted if someone was responsible for making them aware of the vast range of skills and abilities that exist within mining communities?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord has a strong point. Equally, of course, there are other special employment and training measures such as community industry, enterprise allowance and job release schemes, all of which cover the sort of people he is referring to.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, may I remind the noble Earl of the report on European Community Coal Policy produced by your Lordships' Select Committee on the European Communities, and particularly the conclusion in paragraph 116 (r) which recommends that:
The United Kingdom Government will need to take new regional initiatives to deal with the consequences of pit closures concentrated in South Wales, Scotland and the North-East"?That appears in your Lordships' own Select Committee report. Have the Government yet made a formal response to that recommendation and, if it was accepted by the Government, would it not assist in solving the present dispute in the mining industry and provide real jobs for any miners dispossessed of jobs?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, my answer is three-fold. First, as I stated in my reply to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, there are a great number of schemes to cover areas affected by loss of jobs. Secondly, there have been discussions between the Department of Energy and the National Coal Board on the possibility of setting up a similar organisation to that mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Diamond, earlier. But, at the moment, we do not believe that the circumstances are such that this should be done. My third point comes back to the original one. At the moment, jobs are being found in other pits and up to the beginning of this year there were no redundancies involving anyone under 50.
§ Lord GormleyMy Lords, have the Coal Board definite plans for pit closures as against dealing with them piecemeal?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, as the noble Lord knows, the subject of pit closures is for the National Coal Board, which follows the established consultation procedure of which the noble Lord is well aware. The difficulty is that there is no simple trade-off that can be made between redundancy terms and efforts to create jobs.
§ Lord GrimondMy Lords, is the Minister aware that an initiative was taken by Mr. MacGregor's predecessor at the British Steel Corporation under which the corporation set up an organisation that did a great deal to find alternative jobs at Corby when the steelworks there was closed? Will the noble Lord perhaps have a word with Mr. MacGregor in his new incarnation to see if a similar initiative might be taken in certain places where pits are closed, leaving widespread unemployment?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, yes. As I said earlier, we have indeed considered this. I shall bring it again to the attention of my right honourable friend. But the circumstances are very different, as I tried to explain in my supplementary answer, from those in the steel industry.
§ Viscount MountgarretMy Lords, I wonder whether my noble friend the Minister can answer this question. If noble Lords opposite think that it is such a jolly good idea to set up subsidiary companies to deal with employment after the closure of pits, why did they not put something into effect when they during their term of office closed, I think I am right in saying, some 300 pits?
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, because we had full employment.
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I am not trying to draw the Opposition in the way that my noble friend has done, but, as I have said, the situation is different.
§ Lord DiamondMy Lords, will the noble Earl be good enough to reconsider the answers he has given, which seem clearly based on the assumption that there have always been pit closures, as he has said, and that there is no difference in the situation today? That is not the picture as the miners see it. It is a very different picture. They see the Government as being unappreciative of their circumstances. Would it not therefore be wise for the Government to be seen to be taking some initiative directed towards the severity of the problem as the miners see it?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I really do not know where the noble Lord has been over recent years. So far as I can understand it, the miners are very appreciative of the redundancy terms, which are extremely generous. Any idea that the situation is comparable to what the noble Lord suggests, I reject.