Transport House has recently distributed a most curiously timed "Talking Points" on the future for coalminers, The most important paragraphs dealing with possible solutions for the coal industry's contracting role in the British economy are as follows: "A guaranteed market? It has been argued that all would be well if the Government were to guar antee the N.C.B. a market of 200 million tons a year, Lower prices might help towards this. We might keep down the price of coal by subsidy. Neither the N.C.B. nor the National Union of Mineworkers has asked for this, Alternatively we could burden the price of coal with the cost of uneconomic pits and artificially push up the price of other fuels. In both cases the result would be the same - a heavy burden on the costs of the community. “We would have to slow down the development of new gas-making processes based on oil and mtural gas, which have transformed the nationalised gas industry into one of our most spectacular growth industries. We would also have to slow down the development of nuclear encrgyeeesceeee’ The document goes on to emphasise the need for a concentrated coal industry where pits are “economic", and for higher productivity.
let's look at this more closely. There is no mention of the costsstructure and pricing policy of coal in this document. No mention of the huge profits made by the coal distributors which are preventing coal being effectively competitive with other fuels. The miners should insist on the nationalisation of the whole industry, including distribution. Secondly | there is no mention of bringing mtural gas resources and oil distribution under more effective government control, Then we come to the miners who will lose their jobs in "uneconomic" pits, This document states: "The Government's proposals include: a) Transport for miners who move to pits within travelling distance of their homes. b) Improved transfer allowances to mincrs who move to take up jobs in other coalfields. c) And of course houses for those men and their families." For those who hve to leave the industry, "the Government is working to see there is alternative @mployment, Programies for the construction of Government-financed advance factories include 32 in coal mining areas. Four now industrial rehabilitation units are to be set up to help displaced men to find suitable work. Further help will be given by the Governnent Training Centres which are being expanded." Marvellous, isn't it! There is no attempt here to begin to estimate the mmber of jobs which will be created in this way, where they will be, or what sort of work. How many, for instance will be in Scotland? We cannot be fobbed off with this kind of soft-soaping. Surely as a basic minimum guarantec, miners will want:- 1) guaranteed earnings, not just basic rates of pay; 2) guaranteed housing which the can afford; 3) a realistic assessment of what jobs are being created, and where; h) guaranteed training schemes which are planned in line with the new industrics and jobs; 5) guaranteed full employment, otherwise retraining makes no sense at all. And there may well be others, These are the sorts of points we must help the miners make. Finally, what on carth are “industrial rehabilitation units"? Brain-washing outfits for the convenience of managers, stocked with soggy literature like this Labour Party document?