§ 9. Sir JOHN BUTCHERasked whether, with reference to the sum of 1s. 2d. per ton of coal raised which the Interim Report of 20th March, 1919, of the Sankey Committee recommended should be allowed to coal-owners, he will state on what basis of calculation that sum was arrived at, and what Clauses of the Coal Mines Control Agreement of 28th July, 1917, have a bearing on this question; whether the anticipations and assumptions as to output profits and prices which were made in Clauses 9 and 10 of the Interim Report above referred to have been verified by events; if not, in what respect they have proved inaccurate; and whether these inaccuracies vitiate the basis and calculations on which the sum of 1s. 2d. per ton was arrived at?
§ Sir A. GEDDESMr. Justice Sankey and his colleagues who signed the Interim Report have not furnished to the Government any statement of the basis of calculation on which they arrived at the sum of 1s. 2d. per ton raised which they recommended should be allowed to coal-owners; the evidence which they had before them has been published in three volumes, of which the third sets out tables of figures put in by witnesses, from which it appears that 1s. 2d. per ton is slightly in excess of the average profit of the last five pre-war years. The Clauses of the Coal Mines Control Agreement which bear upon the amount of profits receivable or retainable by owners are 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 15, but there is no reason to think that these Clauses were considered in the calculation of the sum of 1s. 2d. per ton. The anticipations and assumptions as to output profits and prices which were made in Clauses 9 and 10 of the Interim Report have not so far been verified by events. Had Mr. Justice Sankey and his colleagues been able to predict the events which have happened since they made their recommendations, I cannot say what differ- 874 ence, if any, it would have made in the basis and calculations on which the sum of 1s. 2d. per ton was arrived at.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERIn view of the fact that these estimates made by the Sankey Commission have proved to be inaccurate, is there not a case for a reinvestigation of the process by which they arrived at the 1s. 2d.?
§ Mr. SWANWhat is the average return per cent. on the capital invested represented by the 1s. 2d. per ton?
§ Sir A. GEDDESI would not like to give a figure as to that without notice. In reference to the other point, the figure 1s. 2d. was accepted by the Government at the time as a proper basis on which the whole finance in reference to coal production should be founded, and that figure has been adopted since then.
§ Mr. HOLMESIs it not a fact that on Friday week the House by a large majority refused to investigate the figures which the hon. Member for York now wants investigated?
§ Sir W. RAEBURNDid not the Commission deal not with profits but with wages and hours?
§ Sir A. GEDDESNecessarily the question of profits came in as soon as the question of wages was being discussed. They are inextricably bound up together in all our operations.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERIs not it open to the House and the Government without any breach of trust to reconsider the amount of 1s. 2d. a ton in view of the facts as they have turned out?
§ Sir A. GEDDESI hesitate to express any opinion as to what the House would do without any breach of faith, but I do not think that the Government would very easily depart from the undertaking given without very good reason being shown in the House without coming somewhere near a breach of faith.
§ 24. Mr. HOLMESasked the President of the Board of Trade what was the aggregate of the pre-war standards of all the colliery undertakings after deducting the amounts representing the profits arising from sources other than the raising of coal?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain)Estimates of the pre-war standards of 875 colliery undertakings are given in Tables 1, 4 and 7 of Appendix 54 to the Minutes of Evidence of the Coal Industry Commission. These standards include profits arising from sources other than the raising of coal, which profits cannot be estimated so far as the standards are concerned.
The 1917 estimated standards stated are:
Table. Concerns. Amount. 1. Non-composite £9,899,000 4. Composite, which include coke ovens 10,266,000 7. Composite, which do not include coke ovens 3,248,000