Coal Mining Industry: Future Development (Hansard, 31 October 1984)

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Gray of Contin)
My Lords, the National Coal Board, which is statutorily responsible for the efficient development of the coal mining industry of this country, has made positive and constructive proposals for the industry's future. These proposals have been accepted by the industry's trade unions with the exception of the National Union of Mineworkers. It is the view of many miners themselves that the NUM should also now accept those proposals.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, may I thank the Minister for that quite irrelevant reply? The fact of the matter is that there is a most massive strike going on at this very moment which any sensible person would want to see come to an end. That was the purpose of my Question, and not in any way (would the noble Lord agree?) do I wish to apportion blame in one way or the other. But with an independent committee that was answerable neither to the NUM or NACODS nor to the National Coal Board, their findings would give encouragement to miners and, indeed, to the specialists in the National Coal Board. What I am talking 519 about, and what I am asking the Minister to be serious about, is the future of a vital part of British industry; namely, its coal reserves and coal supplies.

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that I have never been more serious about anything; but the National Coal Board did make clear to the conciliation service and the mining unions its readiness to give full weight to the advice of an independent advisory body appointed to consider disputed proposals under the colliery review procedure. But it would be completely unreasonable for anybody to expect the board to relinquish its responsibility for managing the coal industry. The staff of the National Coal Board are expert in the geological and mining engineering questions which affect the coal industry, and they are dealing with them on a day-to-day basis.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, does my noble friend's Question not have added relevance in that he wants an independent body to study these matters, bearing in mind the document marked "Secret" which was issued by the north-east area today, which is referred to in the national newspapers and which in fact projects a run-down of the coal industry in the north-east with a loss of 5,500 jobs by 1988 and another 12,000 by the 1990s? Does that not show that while the NACODS negotiations were going on there were already secret plans going ahead to close down, or virtually to close down, the north-east area; and was that not really treachery?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I am really amazed at a parliamentarian with the experience of the noble Lord making a statement of that sort from the Dispatch Box. Mr. MacGregor, as chairman, has made the miners the best offer in the industry's history: a generous pay award, a guaranteed job for those wishing to stay in the industry, generous assistance for those transferring to other jobs or leaving the industry, massive investment in the coal industry's future, and an enterprise scheme to help bring new jobs to mining areas. If Mr. Scargill had the real interests of his miners at heart he would accept the board's remarkably good offer, as other mining unions have already done, and stop scare-mongering.

§ Viscount Massereene and Ferrard
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that every tonne of coal mined in this country costs the taxpayer £60, in other words, £3,000 million a year and in fact it could be imported at £30 a tonne?—not that I would advise that, but I should just like to point it out. If only Mr. Scargill would behave himself and allow this procedure of closing uneconomic mines to go through we would then probably have a viable coal industry which would save, as I said, the taxpayer £3,000 million a year.

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his observations, which of course are accurate, but it is no part of the Government's intention to do other than give wholehearted support to the coal industry; and indeed the steps which my honourable and right honourable friends have taken since 1979 have wholly committed them to this. It is 520 at times difficult, when the National Coal Board finds that it has to negotiate with somebody who to all intents and purposes is more interested in the political outcome of the dispute than in the real interests of his members.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, would my noble friend the Minister agree that the form of the Question, quite rightly, in no way seeks to canvass the merits of the miners' dispute and that the Question is a serious one? Would he agree that the future of the mines is dependent upon productivity, price, demand and also upon a predictable supply?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, yes, I could not disagree with anything that my noble friend has said. I think his assessment of the situation is accurate.

§ Baroness Gaitskell
My Lords, is the Minister aware that Mr. MacGregor has never been generous to the miners from the word "Go" and we cannot expect things from him?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I respect the view of the noble Baroness of course, but I think that if she will do her research and read precisely what has been put on offer to the miners, she will find that the statement which I have made this afternoon is absolutely correct.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many coal-faces have been damaged—some of them perhaps permanently, all of them temporarily—by flooding, by underground fires and by a falling in of underground roadways and that all of these damaged coal-faces will cost a great deal of money to put into order again? Is this a factor which, so far as he is aware, is being borne in mind in the further negotiations with regard to this strike?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I think my noble friend will realise that those factors are well known to both sides who are negotiating. The actual up-to-date figures are that 20 producing faces have already been lost and a further 84 faces are causing serious concern at collieries throughout the British coalfields. This is a very serious situation and one which many working miners will be appalled about when they realise the potential consequences. I am sure that everybody on this side, and I am sure on both sides, hopes that the negotiations which are taking place today can be concluded satisfactorily and that Mr. Scargill will appreciate the benefit of what he is being offered, set aside his political views, and settle on the facts.

The Earl of Halsbury
My Lords, with reference to the Question on the Order Paper, would the noble Lord agree that we already have an independent source of authority, the Institute of Geological Sciences? Would he further agree that where it and the coal board do not always see eye to eye with regard to reserves, as mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, it would be quite impossible to find any third body so much more authoritative than either of them that its ajudication could be accepted?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I think I have made it absolutely clear that the National Coal Board is 521 prepared to give full weight to the advice of an independent advisory body appointed to consider disputed proposals under the colliery review procedures; but I think also we must realise that the National Coal Board is statutorily responsible for the management of coalfields, and for it to devolve this power would be quite wrong. It has fully indicated that it is agreeable to taking due note of any recommendation, but the final decision must be for those who manage.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, may I say that the real purpose of my Question was this? At some time this awful dispute will end. What we have to do is to find something which is not there yet which could prevent this situation from ever happening again. Arbitrators and referees do not really count. My proposal was that there should be geologists and mining engineers, not on the side of the NCB, who have the right to govern and run the pits, and not on the side of the National Union of Mineworkers, who have the right to look after their members, but who with their experience as geologists and mining engineers could quite easily make a fantastic contribution to prevent anything like this from happening again. May I say this to the Minister. We had the coal industry examination and final report in 1974, we had the Plan for Coal in 1977, and we have now had established a miscellaneous one hundred and one set of Ministers. Nothing seems to be resolving this. All I would plead and ask is this——

Noble Lords
Order, order!

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, all I would ask is this: will the Government give consideration to my recommendation to end the dispute and to prevent it from ever happening again?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, so far every move which has taken place towards a solution—every move, every concession—has been made by the National Coal Board. So far there is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Scargill is prepared to concede one iota. Therefore, I reiterate to the noble Lord that what he asks for in his Question the National Coal Board is prepared to some degree to accede to. It is prepared to take due note of advice of a body such as the noble Lord suggests. But I would reiterate that the ultimate management must be in the hands of those who manage—and that is the National Coal Board.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, would not my noble friend agree that the questions of the noble Lord opposite are a marvellous example of the way in which hope continues to triumph over experience, in that he evidently believes that some special wisdom might emanate from a specialist committee, while all experience teaches that such bodies only confuse counsel?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I take note of the comments of my noble friend but, to stick as closely as I can to the terms of the noble Lord's Question, I have indicated that the coal board would be prepared to take on board the view of any such body but that theirs must be the ultimate decision.

Lord Paget of Northampton
My Lords, is not the trouble here that we have had terms offered which could, and almost certainly would, have been accepted if they had not come from sources which have made themselves utterly distrusted, and that the kind of answers we have been getting from the Minister simply increases that distrust and makes acceptance less and less likely?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I would remind the noble Lord that one union has already negotiated and reached a settlement on terms which it considers to be fair to both sides. If the National Union of Mineworkers would adopt a similar approach the whole question of the strike would be resolved today.

Lord Wallace of Coslany
My Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister aware that he and many other people would be well advised to take personalities out of this? Is he further aware that instead of making reference to "Scargill" and "MacGregor" it would be far better to refer to the NUM and the National Coal Board in this dispute?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I am afraid that the attitude of Mr. Scargill in this dispute, and particularly of some of those from whom he has sought counsel, makes it very difficult to keep personalities out of this.

§ Lord Denham
My Lords, at a convenient moment after—

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, will the noble Lord give way?

§ Lord Denham
My Lords, I prefer not to.

Noble Lords
Order!

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, I should like to ask one further supplementary question. The House will have listened with interest to what the noble Lord, Lord Gray of Contin, has said, but will he answer this question? Will he confirm that while negotiations were going on with NACODS a secret document was in preparation, and was about to be published, which would reduce the number of men in the north-east coalfields by 12,000? Will he confirm that?

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, before my noble friend replies, may I ask him whether he is aware that if the Government Chief Whip has advice to give it is usually within the courtesies of this House to hearit?