|
Clause 66
Miners' welfare institutes
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Hoban: I am uniquely qualified among those on this side of the Committee to raise the issue of miners' welfare institutes because I am probably the only hon. Member, at least among Conservatives, who is the son of a former miner.
Column Number: 346
I wonder whether the provision has just been lifted wholesale from the 1964 Act, without taking advantage of the opportunity to update some of the wording to reflect the current state of mining communities. It is interesting that subsection (5)(c)(i) refers to committees or boards consisting
''partly of persons employed, or formerly employed, in or about coal mines'',
whereas subsection (3) defines a miners' welfare institute as
''an association organised for the social well-being and recreation of persons employed in or about coal mines''.
That begs the question of why those who were formerly employed are on the committee, but I do not think that that line of questioning will be profitable or fruitful at this point.
I wonder why the Government did not take advantage of the legislation to broaden the definition of those who could be members of miners' welfare institutes by referring to those who were formerly employed, as well as those who are currently employed, thereby reflecting that in many coal-mining areas where such institutes are located there are few, if any, people who are employed in the mining industry.
Dr. Howells: Clause 66 applies the arrangements for qualifying clubs to a relevant miners' welfare institute. While recognising certain differences, it allows the institute's premises and its enrolled membership to be treated as if it were a club like other working men's clubs. Furthermore, anything done by the institute's trustees or management is treated as if done on behalf of the club. That is in many ways a crucial difference.
The Bill adopts the position of the Licensing Act 1964 in order to preserve the valuable tradition whereby miners' welfare institutes are treated like other clubs operating under club committees. Such institutes are enormously well regarded in their communities and are organised for the social well-being and recreation of persons employed, or formerly employed, in or about coal mines. As the hon. Member for Fareham knows, very few miners' institutes had bars until relatively recently. They were often forced, mainly in the late 1960s and 1970s, to incorporate bars or to begin to run bars. The coal mine closures during that time meant that the subscriptions to the institutes that had come directly from miners' wages were no longer being paid. As a consequence, the institutes had to find a way to generate alternative revenue.
The Bill sets down unique qualifying conditions for institutes because of their special nature. Two thirds of the institute's board or committee must include persons appointed or nominated, or appointed or elected from among persons nominated by one or more licensed operators within the meaning of the Coal Industry Act 1994, and persons appointed or nominated, or appointed or elected from among persons nominated by one or more organisations representing persons employed in or about coal mines.
If special circumstances apply to a particular institute and that is not possible, an alternative
Column Number: 347
condition applies. The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the matter. The huge number of mine closures in the 1980s resulted in coal miners who were still quite young moving away from the villages during that shake-out and looking for jobs in other parts of the country. Under the alternative condition, at least two thirds of the committee or board must consist of persons employed or formerly employed in or about coal mines and persons appointed by the Coal Industry Social Welfare Organisation or a body or person to whom the functions of the organisation have been transferred. The range of people is not limited to those who may have worked in the mine or even around the mine. I hope that that deals with some of the hon. Gentleman's questions.
A final condition is that the premises of the institute are held in trusts to which section 2 of the Recreational Charities Act 1958 applies. Those technical provisions are important. As the hon. Gentleman implied, they have been taken from the previous legislation so that those important institutions are not excluded from the privileges afforded to similar working men's clubs and their premises certificates.
I make it clear that many miners' welfare institutes function very well as clubs, have a healthy turnover and are active in their communities. I do not want to suggest—I am sure that the hon. Gentleman does not want to—that the decline of the coal industry has resulted in all those clubs being on their knees, because that is not so. Indeed, the committees and trustees of clubs have shown tremendous imagination and managerial expertise, often in association with progressive breweries, in turning those institutions into properties with excellent amenities for their communities. We should pay tribute to that.
4 pm
Mr. Turner: I was interested to hear the exchange between the Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for Fareham because an opportunity may be being missed to draw on the experience of miners' welfare institutes, the details of which I was unaware. In some communities, commercial organisations, businesses, engineering firms and others run similar clubs and organisations for their staff and sometimes for former staff. In my constituency, the GKN Westland club was an example but, sadly, it closed down recently. However, as I understand it, the principal distinction between the institutions referred to in clause 66 and those referred to in clauses 62 to 64 is their government the Minister will tell me if I am wrong—and the fact that they are managed in part by the employers and in part by the members, employees or people acting on their behalf. That does not seem to be a system that is unique to miners' welfare institutes.
Dr. Howells: I appreciate the point that the hon. Gentleman is making and he is right because many other industries have their own version of miners' institutes, although elements of miners' institutes, because of the isolation of communities, are probably a little different. We are dealing not with
Column Number: 348
other sectors of industry, but with the transfer of legislation that worked well for miners' institutes into the new legislation. We are not missing an opportunity for other industries; the clause simply deals with miners' institutes.
Mr. Turner: I accept that and I do not intend to detain the Committee much longer. I am merely concerned that the omission of an equivalent clause covering such constitutional arrangements in other clubs, taken alongside clause 64(2), prevents other clubs with similar constitutional arrangements from enjoying the benefits of club certificates.
Dr. Howells: I do not believe that we are doing that.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 66 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 67
Associate members and their guests
Mr. Moss: I beg to move amendment No. 205, in
clause 67, page 39, line 21, leave out from 'club' to end of line 22 and insert—
'(b) he has been a member of that other club for at least two days, and
(c) the club's committee or subcommittee responsible for the supply of alcohol is satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that the primary purpose of that other club is not the supply or purchase of alcohol.'.
To prove that a visiting member is a member of a recognised club is pretty difficult. By the Department's own admission, it would rely on the secretary of the other club, probably more than anyone else, confirming that the club was indeed recognised. That in turn would require the certification that the relevant wording in clause 62 was included in its constitution. Furthermore, as we have discussed, the requirement that the club is conducted in good faith as a club can be determined only by the licensing authority, having regard to the terms of arrangements for the purchase of alcohol, the use of club money, property or profits to the benefit of anyone except the club
''for charitable, benevolent or political purposes'',
the proper keeping of accounts and the provision of financial information to members, and, of course, the nature of the club premises. All those things will already have been taken into account when the licensing authority deems that the club is being conducted in good faith.
Surely it would be much simpler to invoke the standard safeguard of the two-day interval between application and membership, which our revised paragraph (b) provides?
Mr. Kevan Jones (North Durham): Is it not the case that in the CIU movement, in Conservative associations, and certainly in Labour clubs, guests go from club to club and have cards to prove that they are members of the overall organisation? If there is any unruly conduct on the part of the individual, disciplinary action can be taken by the members of their own club. Therefore, by restricting access to members of the CIU, Conservative associations or Labour clubs, people can move from club to club.
Column Number: 349
Mr. Moss: I am not sure about that. I hear what the hon. Gentleman is saying. Such movement is perhaps facilitated by the arrangements that he mentioned, but we are attempting to make absolutely certain that the club at which visitors and guests are being entertained—if I may use that word—complies with the law set out in clause 67. Our suggested paragraph (c) would allow the host club more safely to admit a member of another club. The Bill would be clearer.
Nick Harvey (North Devon): The hon. Gentleman is wrong to propose the amendment. It would delay the access of members of other clubs to social clubs. From a constituency point of view, many of the clubs in seaside towns in North Devon offer their facilities to people who are visiting resorts and are members of clubs elsewhere. Some people come only for a long weekend or a few days and if they had to wait for the two days proposed in the hon. Gentleman's amendment, half their holiday would be gone. Clubs allow members of other clubs simply to show another club card, be it from the National Union of Liberal Clubs, the CIU, or, heaven forfend, even from Conservative or Labour clubs—such people are simply allowed to brandish their cards and come in. That approach is preferable to the delay that is inherently built into the hon. Gentleman's amendment.
| 
