§ 32. Mr. Hamiltonasked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will now consider the cessation of the sale of nutty slack.
§ 36. Lieut.-Colonel Liptonasked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether, as a practical stop to reducing air pollution, he will increase the price of nutty slack and reduce the price of smokeless fuel to household consumers in London and other large towns.
§ Mr. Geoffrey LloydNo, Sir, but I would urge domestic consumers to avoid banking up their fires with small coal when fog is likely, and to burn more coke, the smokeless fuel which is at present in ample supply.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs the Minister aware—he must be—that the mild weather has gone a long way towards solving the fuel problem? In the circumstances, does he not agree that the advantages accruing to the use of nutty slack in that respect are more than offset by the disadvantages in its contributing to the creation of smog? Would he not consider either drastically reducing the price of nutty slack, which is daylight robbery, or stopping its sale altogether?
§ Mr. LloydThe consumption of this type of coal is very small in relation to the total consumption and when the weather is windy, as it often is, there is no great harm in burning it along with other coals, and it produces no more smoke. Of course, during foggy conditions, as I said, it is better to avoid banking up with it.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonAs the Minister has done absolutely nothing about air pollution since thousands of people lost their lives in London about a year ago, will he not now depart from pious appeals, which have had no result, and provide a practical inducement as a result of which less of this smoky fuel and more smokeless fuel will be consumed? Would not the cost involved be negligible in comparison with the cost to the community of allowing the present state of affairs to continue?
§ Mr. LloydThe hon. and gallant Member is misinformed. The most practical way of assisting the solution of the problem of smog is to burn more coke, which is at present in ample supply. Partly for that reason, I increased the ration which is available to all householders this winter from 30 cwt. to two tons.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonWhy not cut the price?
§ Mr. NabarroIs it not a fact that the output of smokeless fuel is now at a record high level as a result of my right hon. Friend's policy?
§ Mr. LloydOn the question of price, I must point out that coke is made from very valuable coking coal, which the colleagues of the hon. and gallant Member for Brixton (Lieut.-Colonel Lipton) have recently been urging me to increase in price.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerHas not the Minister offset anything good he may have done by the evil he has done in abolishing the Ministry's Fuel Efficiency Service?
§ Mr. LloydNo, Sir. What I have done is to bring into being the new Fuel Efficiency Company which, in the view of most experts in this field and, I think, of the Ridley Committee, is likely to be more efficient in promoting fuel efficiency than was the old arrangement.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerIs not the Minister violating the specific recommendations of the Ridley Committee that the Ministry's Fuel Efficiency Service should be continued?
§ Mr. LloydIt would be quite wrong to duplicate this service, particularly having regard to the fact that the bottleneck is the shortage of skilled fuel engineers.