NEW ZEALAND COAL.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 224, 20 September 1924, Page 12

NEW ZEALAND COAL.

PROTEST AGAINST IMPORTS.; , , i Z-OUTICIAKS' XTHAHTU.OVS. j .. (By Te-ejiapb.—Special to "Star.") j "vv___CJNGTON, this day. ! An amusing situation arose during consideration of the Mines .Estimates in tbe House of Representatives when Mr. Holland"' -moved".-a '' £5 reduction to indicate the opinion of the House that all coal used .in New Zealand should be produced in the country. He said that everybody, including the Minister for "Mines, agreed with the principle, but behind it they_ had. different reasons. The Minister of. Mines stated that, with _> view- -to extending the use of New Zealand coal in the Railway Department —the largest Government user—he was inviting representatives of the railways, coal-owners and the Miners' Federation to go into the whole question They, would be given every facility - for - investigation of tbe best methods of using New Zealand coal, and money wonld be placed at their disposal -for experiments. Answering Mr. Holland's criticism of the Government for permitting such large coal importations, he said that in 1922, out of 473,683 tons imported, 310,140 tons were consigned to private users, this being 61.48- per cent. Mr. Wilford denied a suggestion by a Labour member that coal was always obtainable in New Zealand. It seemed as if there was. a want of organisation. ' waa in favour of the principle of using New Zealand coal. Hon. G. J. Anderson agreed that it w*t the wish of everybody to use New Zealand coal if available, but why should his estimate be reduced? Mr. Wilford: Make it half a crown. (Laughter). The Minister added that, although the member for Buller was very bland, it wm obvious what he was driving at. There would never he sufficient coal in - New Zealand until those who worked in the mines were prepared to submit their grievances to a tribunal, and then -there"'would be no stoppages of work. He did not want his estimate reduced, however. A Labour Member: Send round the hat. (Laughter). i Mr. Fraser (Wellington Central) < offered to help the Minister by agreeing to reinstate) his threatened £5 on the Supplementary Estimates. < g j _tr. Parry (Auckland Central) pointed out that our. mines were not working full time, although miners were; prepared to work." ' ' . I Mr. Smith (Taranaki) said merchants were, discouraged from developing' the. ' State coal business. - 'j Hon. G. -T. Anderson: That is rubbish. - Mr. Smith replied tbat the officers ot' the Mines Department were anxious to develop the business, hut there always appealed to be a force behind the scene-i that would not persnit -them to run j their business on ordinary business ■ lines.' - j A division on the proposed reduction-! showed less unanimity than the discus-, sion -indicated, the amendment being defeated by 33 votes to 29. v. tTa-erelgped State Mine. .-. "I have been rather suspicious about the; -attitude over itfailure to develop the Ma-Donald'mh»e." near- Unntly,'* declared Mr.-: Parry (Auckland Central). Why, he asked, ' did 'they sell good machinery at thia - mine for an old song? Was" the .Govern.-".' ment afraid to compete against private enterprise? Auckland was often short' of coal. Hon. G. -J. Anderson (Minister ofMines) replied that the work was stopped when it was found that- the; cost would he £250,000 to open "the mine up. Thus, they could not com- . pete against mines already working in the district. It would be utterly impossible to tell a top without losing money, and, declared the Minister, "I am not going to oak the taxpayers to contribute towards cheap coal, for .any | part: of New- Zealand." He denied that-the machinery was sacrificed. It was tent to the State mines, excepting a couple of boilers, for which the Vines got » good price.