British Coal let closure face fall beyond repair

British Coal has privately admitted to the Commons Trade and Industry Select Committee that it has allowed a coalface at a Nottinghamshire pit to deteriorate beyond repair.

Richard Caborn, the committee's Labour chairman, has passed details of the admission to the High Court, which is considering the judicial review brought by unions over the way British Coal handled the planned shutdown of the 10 collieries excluded from the Government's review of a 31-pit closure programme.

British Coal executives have conceded that they will probably lose the case. A ruling is expected to be delivered on Monday.

A letter from British Coal to Mr Caborn accepts the neglect of Y9s face at one of the 10, Silverhill in Nottinghamshire, although it maintains there is another face at the pit that could be brought back into production.

Mr Caborn, who visited Silverhill recently, has written to the High Court highlighting the apparent breach of the commitment British Coal gave to the court, that the 'fabric' of the 10 collieries, most of which stopped production when the closure plans were announced on 13 October, would not be jeopardised while 90-day consultations under employment protection legislation took place.

The development confirms reports in the Independent of findings by Alan Dobbs, an independent mining engineer instructed by the Silverhill unions. Mr Dobbs reported on 16 November: 'If there is a possibility of Silverhill staying open, Y9s is a classic case of the need to advance the face by producing coal.'

The need for major repairs and other work has also been highlighted at other pits among the 10 - Cotgrave in Nottinghamshire, Parkside in Lancashire, and the two-pit complex at Trentham in Staffordshire. But many miners are being sent home on basic pay.

In a tactical decision taken at the committee's private session yesterday, members decided not to tackle Neil Clarke, British Coal's chairman, and Michael Heseltine, President of the Board of Trade, over the neglect of the face during public questioning for fear of diverting the session - the last oral hearing - away from other pressing issues. 'Because it was so sensitive it probably would have dominated the discussion, which would not have helped us with the main thrust of the last session,' one member said.

Mr Heseltine told the open session that he was willing to consider direct state aid for the coal industry at the expense of nuclear power. At present, state-owned Nuclear Electric receives more than pounds 1bn a year from a levy on consumers' electricity bills.

But Mr Heseltine warned that while the idea of a coal subsidy was on the agenda, it could face European Community constraints. Under EC rules, each country is limited to state aid for only 20 per cent of primary energy production. In the UK, this is absorbed by the nuclear levy.

Tim Eggar, the energy minister, said the planned review of the nuclear power industry in 1994 would proceed, in spite of the review of energy policy in the light of proposed pit closures.