"DEAR COAL BILL."

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 101, 1 May 1930, Page 7

"DEAR COAL BILL."

DEBATED BY LORDS. Labour's Attempt To Reorganise Industry. NATIONALISATION URGED. (United P.A.—Electric Telegraph—Copyright) LONDON, April 30. The Lord Chancellor, Lord Sankey, in the House of Lords yesterday, moved tlie second reading of the Coal Mines Bill. He said it proposed: (1) To regulate the production and sale of coal. (2) To facilitate the organisation of tlio industry. (3) To reduce working hours. (4) To establish a national board for the industry. Lord Sankey, who was chairman of the Commission which reported on the coal mining situation in 1926, said he was persuaded that the bill was a step in tho right direction. It would do something to dispel the cloud hanging over a great industry and remove the sense of bitterness which for too long had darkened many of the miners' homes. The Lord Chancellor said he had not changed his mind. Ho was still convinced that nationalisation of the mines was the only solution of the present difficulties. However, he supported the bill because he was a member of a minority Government, which was not entitled to introduce such a sweeping measure as nationalisation, for which he believed there would be a majority in the near future. The right of the House to reject the bill was not disputed, but their wisdom probably would persuade tho members not to throw it out without submitting an alternative. In conclusion Lord Sankey said the believed tho House House desired to act as a great advisory council to the nation. Lord Sankey received an ovation at tho conclusion of what was his first big speech in the House. He had spoken for an hour without notes. , Tories Wish Modification. The Marquis of Londonderry, who is a coalmine owner, intimated on behalf of tho Conservative majority in the House that they would not reject the bill on tho second reading, but would endeavour to modify and amend its provisions and return it to the House of Commons in a. less dangerous form. The speaker contended that the coal industry required to be left to itself, without interference, to continue its own methods of reorganisation. If the Liberals had not gone back on their own principles the bill would not have reached tho House of Lords. Tho measure entailed more bureaucratio control, sterilisation of enterprise and reduced working hours when the trade was not paying, merely to fulfil a pledge lightly and gaily given at the time of the general election. It certainly was a "dear coal bill." The only reason he did not advocate tho rejection of the bill, said the Marquis, was that it would produce more chaos and confusion than an amendment for its modification. Rotten Foundations. The Marquis of Linlithgow said it was as bad a bill as ever was before Parliament. It was built on rotten foundations. He did not see why it should not bo rejected. The speaker said he would have moved tho rejection of the measure if he had thought the Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald, would have dared to go to the country on a policy of dear coal and lower wages for miners. There were many reasons for the belief that the House ultimately would have to take a step which would lead to the downfall of the Government. He hoped when that time came they Would not hesitate to do their duty. Lord Aberconway said the bill was framed on the lines advocated by coalmine owners who represented two-thirds of tho country's output as well as the miners. Admittedly it entailed an advance of 1/ to 2/ in the price of coal, which was needed to put the trade right. He hoped they would realise that the bill was both necessary and statesmanlike. The debate was adjourned.