§ Mr. STURROCK(by Private Notice)asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can now state if, in consequence of the estimated deficiency in the working of the coal industry, it is intended to raise the price of coal to the consumer, and, if so, what will be the effect upon our general export trade in manufactured goods and upon employment?
§ Sir AUCKLAND GEDDESThe Government have decided that the price of coal to the consumer must be raised by 6s. per ton from the 16th of this month. It is hoped that this increase will meet the increased cost due to the payment of the Sankey wage, the forthcoming reduction in hours, and the diminished output per man shift. With regard to the last part of the question, I can only say that I am not in a position to give any estimate in detail, but it must be obvious to everyone that the increased cost of fuel will seriously hamper our manufacturers for export in their competition with foreign manufacturers, and must affect employment.
§ Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKCan the right hon. Gentleman say how many pits are working short time at the present moment?
§ Lieut.-Commander ASTBURYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that if this increase is put on it will close most of our manufacturing concerns in Lancashire; and, if that is the case, will he see that less coal is exported from this country, in order that our home industries may be kept going and be enabled to find employment for the unemployed men in this country?
§ Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKMay I have an answer to my question?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe Noble Lord should give notice of his question.
§ Sir A. GEDDESI am sorry that I am not in a position to answer the question of the Noble Lord. It is quite obvious that I cannot carry the figures in my mind. In regard to the question as to what will be the effect of the rise in the price of coal, I can only say that I regard the probable effect as very serious; but it is no use imagining that we are getting coal cheaper by paying for it out of taxes. The coal is going to cost more, and it appears to the Government that it is much better that people should know it.
§ Mr. T. RICHARDSCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether this increase in price to the consumer has been arrived at as a result of representations by the coal-owners, and whether the continually increasing profits of the coal-owners of the country have been taken into consideration by the Government in consenting to this increase?
§ Sir A. GEDDESMy hon. Friend appears to be under a complete misapprehension. This increase in price is required to meet the cost of coal after the profits are limited, in accordance with the interim Report of the Sankey Commission, to 1s. 2d. per ton. This has nothing to do whatever with profits; it is a matter of cost.
§ Mr. ADAMSONMay I ask if greater care has been exercised with regard to examining all the factors than was exercised in 1918, when the Government increased the cost by 2s. 6d. per ton, and later had to confess that there was no necessity to increase it by even 1d.?
§ Mr. STANTONWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether two wrongs will 1819 make one right, and if the Government did something wrong before surely that would be no reason![HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] As a question—is there any reason, because the Government did something wrong before, why they should now pander even to the miners for the sake of votes, and allow them to exploit the whole British public, and, even in the best interests of the miners themselves, I would ask you to say that this should not be allowed?
§ Mr. HARTSHORNIs it not a fact that the deficiency on the industry at present is due largely to the decreased output, and is the Government taking any steps to remedy that? Is it not a fact that the miners of Great Britain are anxious to have an investigation into this question, and, before putting on this increase, will the right hon. Gentleman adjourn it for a thorough investigation as to the cause of the decreased output and whether it can be remedied?
§ Mr. STANTONOn both sides?
§ Mr. HARTSHORNCertainly. A general investigation, and whether this House will have an opportunity of discussing the whole position?
§ Sir A. GEDDESThree points have been raised which I think it would be advisable to answer. The first point made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite was that the 2s. 6d. additional when imposed was unnecessary. That statement was made at one time, but it was not the putting on of the 2s. 6d. that was incorrect; it was the statement that it was unnecessary that was incorrect. The 2s. 6d. was absolutely necessary to cover increased cost. As to the points raised by the hon. Member (Mr. Hartshorn) accounting for the increased cost of coal, the diminished output is one factor; the increased cost per ton of getting is another factor. It is impossible that the price of mineral hewing should remain the same when the wages of the men who hew that mineral are raised, at all events until such time as has been foreshadowed in the Sankey Report, when a compensating improvement can be made in the method of getting the coal, which is the only plan that has ever been suggested as one by which it would be possible to make a compensating improvement.
§ Mr. HARTSHORNIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in 1915 when the Miners' Federation of Great Britain cooperated in an increased output we secured a. larger output per year per man than was obtained since the passing of the Eight Hours Act, and if that is done again would not it wipe out the whole deficiency that exists at present, and will the Government give an opportunity to the House of discussing the cause of this decline in output?
§ Mr. STANTONDoes the right hon. Gentleman remember that well known Bolshevists and anti-Britishers were allowed to sit upon the Sankey Commission, and will he remember that the whole country looks to a fair Commission, and while everybody is prepared to give fair play to the miners we do not think it right that they should be pandered to more than any other trade or industry.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is not entitled to make a speech.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe Government quite recognise the seriousness of this matter, and realise also that it is natural, probably desirable, that there should be a discussion. We cannot give time specially for it, but there is a Supply day next week, and if it were suitable to take it on this ground, we should be very pleased.
§ Mr. HARTSHORNCould not it be arranged some other time. Next week all the miners will be at the National Conference.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI only wish to do what the House desires. I am sure that a discussion is desirable, and I should have thought that it would not be well to postpone it; but if the general feeling is that it should not take place in the absence of the miners representatives—a view in which I am inclined to agree—I should be willing to have it the following week.
§ Mr. HARTSHORNAm I correct in assuming that the price will not be put up until this discussion has taken place?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWNo. I need not say that this is not a hasty decision. We have been considering the subject for a little while, and the hon. Member and the House will agree that it is utterly impossible that an industry like coal is to be subsidised out of the taxpayers' money. 1821 We have considered the matter very carefully, and have come to the conclusion that we have no alternative except to make the price assimilate to the cost of production.
§ Mr. HARTSHORNHaving regard to the fact that some of us think that there is an alternative, and to the importance of the industries of this country of not putting up the price, would the Leader of the House not agree that until after the discussion the price should not be put up, because I think that we can remedy it?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWSurely my hon. Friend must feel that it is impossible. The Government have definitely come to the conclusion that the price must be raised to something which approaches and does not; exceed the cost of production. No amount of discussion can alter the fact that this addition is necessary in our opinion.
§ Sir D. MACLEANQuite apart from the immediate interests involved, and in view of the great public importance of this matter, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he could not give an opportunity to-morrow, in the usual way, of moving the Adjournment on the Orders of the Day, so that this important question may be immediately dealt with? Failing that, of course there is another Parliamentary opportunity, subject to your leave, Mr. Speaker, at 8.15 to-night.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWWe certainly do not want to put any obstacle in the way of discussion. We think it necessary. The Supply day is generally Thursday. We would be willing to agree to make Monday the Supply day, and take the other business intended for Thursday on Monday.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIf a Commission be appointed, will the right hon. Gentleman see that it is not composed of economic freaks, so that we may get at the facts?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI am afraid that no number of Commissions can alter the facts.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI think it is desirable that the question should be discussed as early as possible, and I would suggest to the Leader of the House that we should fix either Monday or Tuesday.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI have already stated that if my hon. Friends opposite agree to take this as a Supply day we will give it on Monday.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI was going to suggest to my hon. Friends that they accept the offer of the Leader of the House, namely, Monday.
Mr. GIDEON MURRAYI wish to ask whether the Government has fixed a date already for bringing the increase into force?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI stated in my answer that it was 16th July.