§ 20. Mr. Nabarroasked the Paymaster-General, having regard to the cessation of Saturday working at overtime rates in the pits and of American large-coal imports formerly sold at a loss of more than £2 per ton, what estimate he has made of the total saving thus accruing to the National Coal Board during the summer of 1958, with a view to reducing, from 1st April, 1958, the prices of house coal; and whether he will reduce the prices of house coal forthwith.
§ Mr. MaudlingAny savings which may accrue from stopping imports and Saturday working must be considered in relation to other factors operating to worsen the Board's financial position. Arrangements for reduced summer prices, for house coal, on lines similar to those in previous years, are in hand.
§ Mr. NabarroIs it not a fact that, for the last six years, the excuse for putting up the price of house coal has been continuously the loss on the resale of American coal to the domestic market, coupled with the high cost of Saturday working? Now that these factors have been entirely eliminated, would it not be 601 a measure of justice to the householder that he should have a reduction in the price of his coal?
§ Mr. MaudlingI am sure that the National Coal Board, in recommending any future changes in the price of coal, will take into account the savings it will make; but the National Coal Board will have to put them on one side of the balance sheet against any extra costs that might arise at the same time.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanHas the Paymaster-General observed the conflict between the advice which is being tendered to him by two hon. Members who are supporters of his, in that whereas the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) asked that the price of house coal should be reduced, the noble Lord the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke) a minute or so ago advised the Government that, where there is a surplus and a buyer's market, it is the traditional Conservative policy to put up the price? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us which is the true Conservative view?
§ Mr. MaudlingThat is why I described the questions of my hon. Friends as being of a hypothetical nature.
§ Sir P. RobertsIs this not another argument for ending the rationing of house coal as soon as possible?
§ Mr. MaudlingMy noble Friend is anxious to remove the rationing of house coal as soon as possible, but we must have regard to the supply situation, particularly in the light of our declared policy of avoiding further imports of coal, a policy which, I am sure, my hon. Friend would strongly support.
§ Mr. NabarroHas my right hon. Friend noted that the supplementary question from the noble Lord the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke) referred to a surplus of small coals, which may be used only for industrial purposes and on which we want the price reduced still more in order to dispose of them, and that my question related to house coal, which is an entirely different proposition? The hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S. Silverman) is entirely wrong.