HC Deb 08 November 1928 vol 222 cc208-12
47. Mr. BATEY

asked the Prime Minister if, when he made his statement to the House before the adjournment that freight relief for the carrying of coal would commence on 1st December, 1928, he was aware that one-third of the coal in Durham and Northumberland would not receive any freight relief owing to such coal being carried over private railways; and will he state in which way the Government propose to assist these collieries?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister)

I have been asked to reply. My right hon. Friend was aware that part of the selected traffics in Northumberland and Durham passed over private mineral railways and would receive no reduction in freight in respect of those journeys. The proportion of coal affected is not so high as that suggested by the hon. Member. The position of these railways was debated on the Report stage of the Valuation (Rating and Apportionment) Bill, and Parliament with full knowledge of the position, decided that they should be classed as industrial hereditaments and not freight transport hereditaments. These private lines will, therefore, receive their relief as industrial hereditaments when the general scheme comes into operation next year.

Mr. BATEY

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question which asks "in which way the Government propose to assist these collieries"?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

The Government propose to assist these collieries by including them in the general de-rating scheme and they will get their de-rating us an industrial hereditament.

Mr. BATEY

Are we to understand that all these collieries are going to get from the de-rating scheme is only 1.3d. as against 8d. which the other collieries are going to receive?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

No, Sir. Certainly, I cannot accept that figure, and I do not think I can discuss a figure of that kind in answer to a supplementary question. The method in which relief is being given to the coal trade in regard to railway freights is precisely that method of relief for which the coal trade has asked. In addition to that, if we are to come to a, comparison between the costs of private and public lines, I am informed that the average cost on these private lines amounts to about 1s., whereas on the public lines it amounts to about 1s. 7d.

Mr. LAWSON

Does the President of the Board of Trade appreciate the fact that the collieries which were just carrying en before the application of this relief are now, undoubtedly, going to be closet: down as a result of the application of that method of relief?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

No, Sir.

Mr. RUNCIMAN

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade and his colleagues to take a little more time to consider the rather serious anomalies which have become more apparent during the Recess than they were when we discussed this question during the last Session of Parliament The discrepancies are so great that I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not arrive at any premature decision.

Mr. CRAWFURD

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to receive representations on this subject?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I have already received representations on this question, and they have received the most careful consideration of all the Departments of the Government concerned and of the Government as a whole. I must say two things on this question. The first is that this method of relief was specifically asked for by the coal trade, and particularly by the coal trade of Northumberland, Durham, and Wales; and, secondly, if you are to compare the cost of private and public railways, the private railway is at an advantage compared with the public railway.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to imply that the representatives of the coal trade in South Wales, Northumberland and Durham are in full agreement with the proposals which the right hon. Gentleman is now making?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

Certainly. Those coalowners who own private railways would no doubt like to receive a subsidy for their railways, hut what I stated was that the coal trade as a whole, and in Northumberland, Durham and South Wales particularly, asked for this method of relief.

Mr. BATEY

They did not, and you know it.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

The coal trade particularly asked that the original proposal of the Government which gave a flat rate of relief all round to all collieries should be altered to a relief concentrated on coal carried on railways for export and bunkers, and steel and so forth.

Mr. MacDONALD

Does the right hon. Gentleman wish us to understand that the coal trade, as represented by the properties run by companies on private lines, is being subsidised and helped to the same extent as the coal trade represented by owners who do not own private lines?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I rather demur to the word "subsidy." What has happened is that the public railways are being relieved of rates on condition that they pass on the relief to certain customers. No two companies get the same relief; the colliery company sending its coal entirely to an ordinary industry or domestic market gets no advantage out of the railway rate relief, whereas the colliery company sending its coal largely for export gets a very great advantage. In spite of that, the coal industry as a whole in those exporting counties particularly asked for the form of relief which we are proposing.

Mr. BATEY

Is it not a fact that the owners of collieries running coal over public railways have asked for this relief and the private railways have protested against that class being given relief.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I do not think that is fair. The Minister of Health, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and myself received representations from the whole of the Mining Association and also from the associations representing Durham, Northumberland and Wales. If the hon. Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey) will ask the coal associations in Northumberland, Durham and Wales whether they desire to have the present proposal or some alteration of it, he will find that those associations are prepared to stand on the present proposal.

Mr. RUNCIMAN

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade and his colleagues not to close their minds on this subject, because fresh facts are coming to light every week. I hope they will postpone their final decision or at all events reconsider this question.

Mr. CONNOLLY

May I ask if this subject can be re-opened when the Bill to be introduced by the Minister of Health this month is considered?

Mr. SPEAKER

I think any further questions on this subject should be put on the Order Paper.