§ 17. Mr. Nabarroasked the Minister of Fuel and Power, having regard to the increase of nearly 20 per cent. in the price of house coal during 1955, for what reasons he has now authorised further price increases effective from June, 1956; how much per centum and how much in shillings per ton average is the latest increase authorised, respectively, for retail sales in the West Midlands, including Birmingham and Kidderminster, and in London; and what part of the additional revenue will accrue to the National Coal Board and what part to transportation interests and merchants, respectively.
§ Mr. Aubrey JonesHer Majesty's Government approved the latest increase 12 in the pit-head price of coal because the alternative would have been still worse for the national economy; namely, the continued sale of coal at prices insufficient to cover costs of production, and increased borrowing by the National Coal Board from the Exchequer to meet their growing deficit and development purposes. Since the increase is in the pit-head price the additional revenue accrues only to the National Coal Board.
With permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the percentage increase in the town and cities named in the Question.
§ Mr. NabarroIn view of the recent reference by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to "a plateau" of price stability, can my right hon. Friend say what regard he had to the highly inflationary action of increasing coal prices only such a short time after the Chancellor's reference which I have quoted?
§ Mr. JonesThe increase in coal prices was made with the full approval of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and was taken into account by him when using the expression "a plateau". The alternative would have been a still larger subsidy, and subsidies are not, in the view of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the way to cure inflation.
§ Mr. H. HyndIs not a reason for the increased price of coal the loss on the imported coal which the Minister has just told us amounts to £3 10s. a ton? Is it fair that the loss should fall on the National Coal Board?
§ Mr. JonesWere I to exempt the National Coal Board from that loss, I should be relieving it of its responsibility to meet the coal requirements of the country, and I see no reason why I should so relieve it.
§ Lieut. - Colonel Bromley - DavenportHow can any Government keep down the cost of living when coal, on which practically all ultimate costing depends, keeps rising in price? Can the Government, therefore, take any immediate action to stop these rising prices in the nationalised industries?
§ Mr. JonesI hope, and I am sure it will be so, as I said earlier, that all in the 13 coal industry will note my hon. and gallant Friend's supplementary question and will agree with him that constant increases in wages which are unaccompanied by increases in output cannot but lead to higher prices, which are most regrettable.
| GROUP 4—HOUSE COAL | ||||||||||
| Place | Maximum Retail Price at 31.5.56 | Maximum Retail Price at 1.6.56 | Increase | Per cent. | ||||||
| s. | d. | s. | d. | s. | d. | |||||
| Birmingham | … | … | … | 121 | 5 | 128 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 5½ |
| London | … | … | … | 146 | 0 | 152 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 4½ |
| Kidderminster | … | … | … | 121 | 5 | 128 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 5½ |