BRITISH COAL.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18635, 9 March 1926, Page 10

BRITISH COAL.

NATIONALISATION PROPOSAL. SCHEME EXAMINED. (FEOU OCR OWX COHaESPOKDEKT.) LONDON, January 15. A strange and wonderful nationalisation scheme was unfolded before the Coal Commission, one of its salient features being that the State, or the taxpayer, should bear the financial responsibility, but the real business of running the mines should be in the hands of Councils—national and provincialrepresenting chiefly the miners and the mine officials. The State is to pay, and the 'workers" are to control.* 'lhe miners have not even put a case for themselves. The matter has been taken out of their hands by a Joint Committee representing the chief Trade Union and political organisations of the Labour •'Movement," and the scheme so evolv-' cd was expounded by an eminent member of the intelligentsia of the Party, Mr R. H. Tawney, who is a Fellow of Ballioi College, Oxford. A note on the official memorandum ot evidence said:—The proposals contained in the following evidence have been the subject of discussion by a Joint Committee representing the Miners Federation of Great Britain, the General Council of the Trades Union Congress, the Executive Committee of the Labour Party, and the Executive Committee of the Parliamentary Labour Partv. The evidence is submitted as representing the general conclusions reached bv the Joint Committee and as corroborative support of evidence that has been given on similar lines. There is no suggestion in the scheme of immediate relief to avert a ensis m May, nor of anv compulsory, arbitration to end any deadlock regarding wages. The Scheme. "We suggest," says the report, "that the coal industry should become .an organisation for mining coal, manufacturing electrical power, on a very large scale, making both coke and smokeless fuel, and producing in addition, gas, fuel oils, ammonium compounds, chemical base materials from tars, and other bv-products. We propose that this transformed industry should be nationally owned." , ... .. New executive and administrative bodies are suggested to conduct the reformed industry. They are: A Power and Transport Commission, consisting of six full-time Commissioners with expert knowledge. The functions of the Commission in the development of power and transport would be to (a) Survey the problems of power and transport; (b) Administer the interconnexion ,of generating stations, and the trunk line transmission of power; (c) Lay down conditions governing .power and transport; (d) Co-operate with the Department of Industrial and Scientific Research in the promotion ot "SSLI Coal and Power Production Council—twelve members in all, drawn from equal numbers of administrative officials, miners, and byproduct workers, with two members ot the Power and-Transport Commission. This council would he responsible for the organisation and conduct of the industry throughout the country. Consumers' Council, presided over by the Secretary for Mines. It would consider all matters common to every class of consumer, including prices, transport rates, and methods of distribution.

Wages and Prices. Questions of wages and prices would come under the purview of joint meetings of-the-Coal and Pqwe T ■rvoduetion Council' and, the Consumers Council. In the event of a majority of the combined body agreeing that ' a change should he made they would have the authority to put it into force. A disagreement would be referred to a special Court of Referees, on the lines of the Railway Rates Tribunal. It is suggested the owner of a mine should receive such amounts of Government stock as would, if sold at current market prices, produce a sum equal to the cash value of his property. " There is no expression \ of opinion regarding the system under which mineral royalties should be acquired by the State, because there is no agreement on this matter among the various sections ; of ; Socialism. It is stated definitely, however, that the Miners' Federation are against any compensation to the royalty owners. Mr Tawney Questioned. Mr Tawney was taken through the plan in detail by Sir H. Samuel (chairman). He said that while they wanted to nationalise by-products in connexion with colliery undertakings they did not propose to nationalise the gas industry. Closely questioned on the subject of wage regulation under the proposed scheme, he argued against compulsory arbitration and placed his faith in "bargaining." The Chairman: In tho last resort, supposing that the industry was bound to be unprofitable, and that it was necessary to lower prices to extend the "trade, and that that involved a reduction of wages and. that the miners' organisation refused to accept a' reduction, jb is not suggested that there should lie any compulsion exercised/ —No, it is not suggested that there should be v compulsory arbitration. In the last resort the men must have jthe right to withhold their labour.' The proposals provide a system of, bargaining which makes that responsibility remote. Sir Herbert suggested that even if the proposals were sanctioned by Parliament, with the most optimistic outlook it would take a year for the whole machinery to be put in working order, and .perhaps t«o or three years. How, he asked, would they meet the economic position of the industry in the meantime ?—Mr Tawney said they had no proposals, but they would bo glad to consider any proposals together with the owners. Sir Herbert (surprised): You have no suggestion to offer the Commission which would help it in its task of finding n solution of the problem which we shall have to meet in May?"—We have no solution at the moment. General Lawrence: You have no constructive scheme at the moment to enable ns to bridge the gap between the two periods?—We have no proposals for the interim period. Miners and Thinkers. Referring -to -pit committees Mr Tawney said: "You have this great community, about as big as the total population of ,New Zealand. If yon are to carry on the industry effectively you have got to get their confidence and their.public opinion on the side of the administration."- ,: • . Sir W. Beveridge: And do you think that the average miner, the fellow at the coal face, really does want to man- , age his own industry? Does he really > spend much of his time' thinking about 1 it?—No more than the average coal ' owner spend his time thinking about ' the beauties of private.enterprise,;.or the average citizen about the concerns of the British Empire. But the

miner trusts and follows the men who are thinking ou'fc these problems, and who are necessarily a minority. In the Air. Several. London journals take the trouble to -point out that the scheme is perfect, but has no relation to life. "It Boats," says the "Morning Post," "like the Land of Laputa, complete in all its parts, in the air. The average ,man of business would not attempt to question it: he would only know instinctively that it could not possibly work. It is an imposing portentous structure of theory resting upon no foundations of practice. Mr Tawney is willing to risk the greatest interest in J the Kingdom, upon which the lives of some millions of people depend, upon a system which has never been attempted in history, since history, as he modestly informed the Commission, tells vouwhat has been, not what can be, done." No Promise of Peace. "No provision," says the "Daily Mail," "is made in it (the' scheme) for getting down the price of coal, which is the one vital necessity to-day. Its real effect is to take the conduct of the mining industry (and the other industries which the miners' leaders think are connected with collieries) out of the hands of, people who understand them, and have invested capital in them, and to put their management into the hands of committees of politicians. Socialist delegates, and officials. In exchange for this the public is not given S3 much as a mere promise of peace. There is to be no. security against strikes when these industries have been nationalised. On the contrary, the country is told that 'the right to strike would not be given, up.' So little do the people responsible for this plan understand their own scheme that after suggesting that the amount paid to the coalowners, as the price for seizing the mines, would be a 'first charge' on the industry, they had to withdraw that statement. To crown everything, they confessed yesterday that their scheme could give no immediate relief, and admitted that they had no solution for the problem which the Coal Commission is studying. The scheme is for the dim and remote future: it does nothing whatever to'help the miner, and, deed, can only hurt him."