PARLIAMENT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1225, 6 September 1911, Page 6

PARLIAMENT.

• THE HOUSE. STATE AS DEALER. SHALL IT SELL COKE. AND FIREWOOD? COAL MINES BILL. The House of Representatives met at 2.30 p.m. yesterday. The Riverton Harbour Endowment and Borrowing Amendment Bill (Mr. J. C. Thomson), tlio Littlo River Domain Board Bill'(Mr. Hardy), and tho Hamilton Domains Bill (Mr. Greonslade) wero ■read a "first timeThe Hon. R. M'KENZIE (Minister for Mines)/in moving the second reading of the Coal Mines Amendment Bill, stated that iii, order to keep the customers of the Stato coal depots, it was necessary to do able to supply them also with coko and firewood. To enable tho depots to do this was the object of Clause 5, as amended by the Mines Committee. - Mr. AV. F. MASSEY, leader of the Opposition said he believed tho dealers in coal/coke, and firewood worked very hard for'less profit than .was made in any othor trade. Some of them made ' less than ordinary labourers- Ho would ask the Minister to consent to somo_ amendment which would prevent any injustico being dono to this deserving class of men. No private- trader could compete against tho Government. It was right for the Government to go into business in order to combat monopolies, but he had not heard of* any monopoly in.this trade. Tho Minister mentioned that he had Minself moved in tho Mines Committee to strike out the power to buy and sell coal from other .mines. Mr. J.COiVIN.(BnIIeT) said"he would move an amendment to make overtime ■on Sundays payable as time and a half. Mr. J. P. LUKE (Wellington South) Protested against such a proposal, which, e said, would be usurping tho functions of the Arbitration Conrt. , Mr. G. J. ANDERSON ■ (Mataura) and Mr: G. M- THOMSON (Dunedin) spoko against the proposal to enable the Department to sell coko and firewood. Mr. AV. H. HERRIES (Tauranga) opposetl the clause which, gjves unions,not registered under the Arbitration Act the same- powers of sending inspectors to tho mines as are enjoyed by registered unions. Ho also objected to the. proposed taking up of the coko and firewood business. Unprofitable Works. ■Mr. Hemes said the Seddonvillo State Coal Mine had always boon, and still was, carried on at a loss. The Point Elizabeth mine, by means.of careful bookkeeping, showed a small profit, but if it had had to bear all the charges that ought to have been placed upon it, he, believed it -would show a • loss. Tho Runanga township was charged "• to tho Lands Department,, whereas a private mining' company would have had to pay for it, and there were other charges in tho saino position. Tho Seddonvillo minehad produced a small coal that would not sell, and so the briquette works wero Started, but the result .was that the loss was doubled. He questioned whether tho Stato Coal, Department had really reduced the price of coal. . Mr. Colyin and Mr. Ell: Oh, yes it has. . Mr. Heriies said it'was a very laudable purpose to reduce the', price of coal to., the working man, but ho thought statistics would show that iit._had not' been •achieved. Ho did not L. see ,what benefit tho Stato '.coal business was to anybody. Their lorries maimed/the citizens, .and when they: Tented premises,tho neighbours fled from the nuisances that were created. Mr. H. G. ELL (Christchurch South) said the utterances of Opposition speakers' had shownjhow little sympathy they had for the podr peo-ple of this country, who need cheap firing. State' coal was supplied in Christchurch at Bs. per quarter ton. Previously 10s. Gd. had been paid to tho Westport Coal Company, which had enjoyed a monopoly in coal of that character. People could go to the State Coal 'Depot and-buy coal,at Is. 9d. per cwt. Moreover the competition of the State had compelled private companies to lower their prices. The Opposition party wero assailing the principle of ■ State trading in necessities to the; people. There was here a clc'ar : line of cleavage. The policy of the Government would be maintained, but they all knew that there would be few extensions of State trading if the Opposition got into power. Mr. A..---L. HEEDMAN (Wellington North) said the State Coal-mines. Department was'.'up doubt a typical instance of. Stata Socialism in this country. So regarded, it did, not. suggest 'that- State Socialism was a desirable thing. Stato' management was tho ■ worst ■ form - of management in the world. It involved waste, neglect, and frequently incapacity. An interesting stage in the history of State coal-mines had been reached. In connection with tho, balance-sheet presentEd to tho Honse; the. other day he,noted, that tho net profit for 1911 was considerably kss than'it was Inst year. In 1910 a profit of .£2390. was shown. In 1911 itwas .£sl. The statement; of "the State Coal Department might havo cheapened the cost to the .retail consumer, but this was done at Hie. cost "of the Railway Do--partment, which was compelled to pay too much for its coal. If the Department had had to pay what a private minenwner had to pay it would have been jonducted at a loss of .£2llO. The Department wrote off-5 per , cent, .for depreciation upon its machinery, and- this was too little. The sinking fund up-to the pre ; rent time was only .£12,200. At this rato .t would take 30 to 35 years to extinguish ;he capital invested. They had a report • irom the manager of one mine that it was ilmost exhausted. The position at Point Elizabeth was not satisfactory, and it was lnderstood that J2OOO would bo expended n opening up new ground. As to tho irice of coal, the figures showed that the Railway Department was charged about Vs. Gd. per ton moro than was charged to ;he depots. The Hon. R. M'Kenzie: You«aro enirely wrong. : Jfr. Herdmaji said that tho , facts as he iad stated thorn appeared in tho balanceiheet for 1910. Coal had been supplied n Christchurch to the municipnl depot it 18s.' per ton, which meant a price of «.. per ton at the mine. Coal had been, upplied to the Christchiirch Tramway department at a prico which was equivaent to is. 6d. at tho mine.' ;ir Joseph Ward's Reply to Criticism, Tho PRIME MINISTER called the.atention of the Hoiue and the country to chat the State Coal Department had lono. There had been a saving to houseloldors in the cities, as a, .result of tho staMishriicnt of this Department, of 10s. o 12s. per ton. This should mean a aving of ,£;>O,(MO a year in • Wellington, n Cliristchurch they wore.iiio doubt, saviig iC30,000 to J35.000 a Wear, at anyato. The steadying institution, so'.far s the price of coal was concerned, was :ndonbtedl.y the State coal mine. If it id not exist thero would be "nothing to ■revent a considerable rise in' price. Coal t n. price as cheap us possible was a ital necessity to tho people. If tlieso tate Coal Depots. deserved tho criticism "veiled a,t them by the Opposition, why 'as it that representations camo from all ver the. country in regard to tho price f coal? .The statomont of the member 3r Wellington North as to tho price harged the Railways was incorreot. Thn rice was Is. per ton less than would ave to bo paid for imported Nowcastlo Dal. ,Mv. G. M. Thomson: What aboiit tho eat values? The- Prime Minister declined to go lto tho heat values. They would ave a good calm discussion. Tho logiil deduction from the argument of tho lember for Tauranga was that tho Stato honlil not havo mines at all, and should nport enormous rptainlities of coal. In nal.vs.im! the Imlpuee-sliret, tho member w Wellington North had mado no men:on of depreciation. In the. eaeo of tho 'pint Elizabeth mine it would be seen :om the balance-sheet that ,£3127 had een written off for depreciation, and th.it he profit for tho year was .£'6179 3a. Gd. 'lid Railway Department.was paying the ime price for screened coal as private idiridnals were. Mr: Herdman said liis complaint was hat the Railway Department was charg[l 2s. Gd. per ton more. -Tho Prime Minister said tho Minister >r Mines informed him that the jprice

was exactly the same. There could be a fair regulation of tho supply of coal in this country by tho Stato owning a mine or two", but he did-not believe that tho whole industry should be nationalised. The Government wanted to carry on the coal work fairly, to pay fair wages, and to sell nt a fair price'to the consumer. Any privato enterprise would havo succumbed long ago lo tho continuous attacks that had been made on .tho Stato coal mines, ybut tho people ns a whole had benefited immensely by their establishment. Tho sooner 'the country realised that the Stato coal mine.* had come to stay tho better. If it said that it was not going to have the mines, it should say so in an emphatic way. Views of Mr. Fisher, Mr. F. M. B. pSItEU (Wellington Central) stated that his personal experienco of the State Coal Deportment had been a reduction in the price of coal from 38s. to -238. A poll of..tho cities would show that very tew people were opposed to the State-depots. There was a danger in looking at ii privato balance-sheet of complaining that a .'dividend of 10 or 12 por cent, was too high, and ignoring losses incurred perhaps for years previously. It was common knowledge when a newspaper was founded that it would ' havo to run for at least threo years without profits. Supposing that for tho next three years profits or 10 per cent, wero obtained, that would bo equivalent to 5 per cent., a moderate dividend. Applying, his argument to coalmining, Mr. Fishor suggested that in an industry where not only interest but capital were likely to bo lost, it would be dangerous to take dividends at their faco value. Between tho State mines and the consumers there stood at present a monopoly, tho Union Company, ' which • was tho only carrier of coal from the West Coast, and could charge what price it liked for the service. Members mentioned the' Maoriland Co. and the Blackball Co. Mr. Fisher continued that if these comparatively small companies could compete with tho monopoly, the State shoulddevelop its enterprise of cheapening coal to the community, and also compoto with the monopoly ho had named. That monopoly seemed to have f acred rights in this country. It seemed to bo protected from end to end of the land. He supposed that if things w.ent on much longer at the present rate it would own the country. It seemed to be a question whether the mine which had been noa-paying torsome time (the Seddonvillo mine) should not be closed down. At present the profits on one mine went to make good the losses on the other. . . . . Mi'. D. M'LAREN (Wellington East) said tho trouble was in the outlying districts that people could not get the supplies of State coal they desired. This womed to show that the service was appreciated by the people. The policy of relieving the people from the burden oi high prices was one aspect of this question that should uever.be lost,sight of. Mr. T. E. Y. SEDBON (AA'estland) said it was almost a unanimous, opinion on the West Coast that-the mines had been a success. An opinion also held down, there was that the Government should purchase the'Wnllsend mine: , . ' ' Mr. R. A..WRIGHT (Wellington South) said it had been complained in' Wellington that the State Coal Department sold short weight. Hβ had had no means of verifyiug this statement, ■ The Hon. R. M'Kenzie: Did you get that from The Dominion? •• Mr. Wright said ho had not, but tho hon. gentleman would himself quote Tjje Dominion if it suited his purpose. Continuing, Mr. Wright asked tho Minister to state whether there had not been serious defalcations in the Department which to some extent accounted for the losses in the bala.nce-sheet? Mr. AVright said he would also like to know whether the Stato Insurance Department was now in tho underwriters' ring. It had come to his knowledge that an official in the Stato Insurance Department, on being queitioned, had declined to .say whether it was. run with tho others. If the Staro office had gone.into the ring, what was the value of the oratorical display they had had that night? The Minister in Reply. * The. Hon. E, M'KENZIE (Minister for Mines) denied that tho State Department in Wellington sold short weight or.sold coal in wot bags, unless they happened to get wot in leaving tho depot. As to defalcations there was nothing in it. About a couple of years ago there was a sljght discrepancy of about ,£IOO at one depot, and one man had been dismissed. As to the Government buying colliers it was necessary that the State or any other owner of a mino should arranw with a steamship company to take • slack and: bunker coal. There was sufficient authority under.the law at present to enable the State to buy colliers, but if it did it could not dispose of the five or six thousand tons of slack and- bunke? coal per, month, now taken by the Union Company. Colliers capable of carrying the output of the State mines would not use more than five or' six hundred tons a month of this coal, and the rest would have to be dumped. Mr. Fisher: They ' have got you on toast. ■ ■ • . . . . The Minister continued that in tho near future a State coal-mine would probably be established in Auckland. The criticism of the Opposition members was of a purely political' character. The member for Wellington North had said that -£3100 odd had been lost last year in working tho Seddonville mine As a fact ■£1839 had been spent in'prospecting the mine. Tho prospects of ■ the Seddouvillo coal-mine wore never brighter than at tho present time. -•■ Even if the State coalmines made a small loss, and they were not established with the intention of making a large profit, their establishment would.-still be justified. The hon. member for Wellington North had said that the Government was charging the Railway Department 2s. Gd. per ton more for coal than was charged to the general public. The facts-were that "until last year the Railway Department' had paid Is. per ton less than private consumers. The Department was now called upon to pay exactly tho same. As to the dust nuisance, the Department had acquired about an acre of land down near the end of the Railway Wharf. They were going -to establish a coal-yard there shortly. The second reading was carried on tho voices, and the Bill was immediately committed. Mr. J. BOLLARD (Eden) asked tho Minister, to knock out the words "coke" and' "firewood" from Clause 5, empowering, the State to sell these articles. Ho had not heard of any extortionate charges being mado for coke and firewood. Mr. J. P. LUKE (Wellington Suburbs) supported the clause, claiming that, in onlur to retain its small customers, tho .State Department must sell coke and ■ Mr! G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said he regretted that tho Stato Coal Department had ever embarked upon a retail trade. The Minister said the clause was intended to legalise a trade already carried on. ' ' '< The clause was adopted. The Bill was reported with amendments. THE HUTT ROAD, PROTESTS AND MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS. ■ Tho-Hutt Road and Railway Improvement Amendment Bill was considered in Committee. Mr. J. P. LUKE protested against tho passage of the Bill, contending that the cost which it was fought to recover from the local authorities was excessive, andthat they had not been consulted. The Minister was not justified in coming down with a ■ claim for .CIOO.IIOO apaiiist tho local bodies. He did not seek to burden the General Government or the Consolidated Fund with a cost that should bo borno by tlio local authorities, but tho cost to these bodies was out of atl proportion. The Hon. J. A. MILLAR said th'is Bill could go into the waste-paper casket, and the liability would still remain on the local bodies. But a gross injustice would be done if the Bill wore rejected, by exempting local authorities that ought to pay having been parties to the original agreement. The local bodies were only being charged the cost of constructing tho r °Mr. R, A. WRIGHT (Wellington South) quoted again the remarks of Sir Joseph Ward and the late Hon. Colonel Pitt in 1903 to tho effect that tho \diflle work was estimated to cost not more than .£IOO,OOO. Mr. Millar: That was tho ITntt Railway Bill. It _ was altered, and tho road was brought in afterwards. •Mr. Wright replied that tho Bill of that time was the Hutt Railway and Road Bill. He read the title and certain clauses to prove this, and lo show that i tho statement that .£IOO,OOO was to he the I post of the road and railway was based i

on the Bill itself. He insisted that tho road should not have cost more than .■O,OOO. The local authorities did not want charity. They wort prepared lo pay a reasonable charge. Telegram from tho Mayor. Mr. D. M'LAREN (Wellington East) said lio had received that day a telegram from the Mayor of Wdlinpton (Mr. AA'ilford), but he was still unablo to understand why Mr. Wilford had communicated with Sir William Steward, and not with local members. The telegram ho hail received that day from tlio Mayor was as follows:— "Pleaso tell mo if Sir William Steward showrd you and Messrs. Herdman, Fisher, Luke, Field, and AVright my letter to him re Hutt Road. Just seen papers. Rcplj-." Mr. M'Laren added that he had consulted the members referred to, and none of them' had soon the letter. What was read by Mr. Fisher in tho House- last week was not the letter referred to, but was a letter from the Town Cln'k to Sir William Steward. It, was very strange that a letter on this Bill should be sent by Mr. Wilford 'to tho member for Waitaki, and not to. any local member. The Hon. J. A. MILLAR, replying on a point mentioned by Mr. Luke, said that if a portion of. Karori was added to Wellington City after 1903, he would not object to that part of the city being excluded from the Bill. Mr. AV. H. FIELD (Otaki) repeated former arguments to show that the local bodies were not being fairly treated. Mr. F. M. B. FIPHER (Wellington Cea. tral): I think the Minister might give us some information about the plot between tho Mayor of Wellington and tho Government about this Bill. The Hon. J. A. MILLAR, said thero was no plot. The Mayor of Wellington told him ho was not going to oppose the Bill, and ho (the Minister) afterwards learnt from another source that the local bodies were going to get the best legal talent and fight the case after the had reported. Tho Government was ready, too, aud if the local bodies liked to fool away their money in that way they could do so. Mr. Fisher asked where the Minister got this information. Tho Minister: From a pretty reliable source. You will see how it comes out. It was not denied by a party who knows all that is going on." Mr. Fisher: Now we are getting the plot. ,■ Mr. Millar: And a very nice little plot, too. Mystery. Mr. Fisher: What a world of mystery! Does the Minister know that the City Council knows nothing whatever about it, and that the members who represent the city know nothing about it? Mr. Millar: I know two lawyers aro engaged in it. Mr. Fisher: "And wHat arc the lawyers going to do? I never knew a Bill so clothed with mystery.". Ho urged that tho Minister should postpone tho Bill. Could ho imagine that the local mem- '" bers wero to be- asked to allow a Bill to go through which must be doing some wrong to the district, since the local bodies intended to fight it afforwards? Mv. Millar said lie bad already postpone"d it four weeks, and would not postpone it aiiy longer. Mr. D. M'LAREN asked what the duty of the commissioner would be. Tho MINISTER said ho would simply apportion the cost between the different bodies. ' _ Mr. M'LAREN continued that the Minister might possess confidential information, but he— n member of tho Wellington City Council—knew nothing of tho alloged intention of the local bodies to proceed to litigation. Mr. R, A. AVRIGHT again raised the point that tho original authority was for .£IOO,OOO. • Sir JOSEPH WARD said tho usual course had been followed in applying, at the outset, for a portion of the total sum required. Members in that House had misunderstood tho utterance of a Minister in another House. Mr. MASSEY said ho remembered the original discussion very well. Tho impression of members was that the work would cost not more than .£1(10,000, and that a good deal of this would be recovered by sale of reclaimed land. Mr. AV. C. BUCHANAN (AVairampa) declared that anyone who had pas;«;d over the work frequently as ho had done must have known that the cost would bo excessive. Mr. FISHER said the AVellington members, owing to lack of. information, were unablo to offer any effective resistance to tho Bill. Thero was no reason why they should keep the. Houss up, but would the Minister give his authority for eaying that tho amount of. the cost was to be fixed by the Railway .Department, and that the sole duty of the Commissioner would be to apportion the liability? Thero was the fact that the conference of local bodies.-had met, and the AVellington members knew nothing of what had passed. He hoped the press wonld report the fact that the AA'ellington members had tried to elicit information of this improper plot concocted by "the Minister for Railways and the Mayor of Wellington. They appeared to be the only two members in possession of information. The othor local members knew nothing about it. Tho Bill was reported without amendments. Tlio House adjourned at 0.50 a.m. ' THE RAILWAYS STATEMENT. AND THE BUDGET. Mr. Wright asked the Minister for Railways yesterday, without notice, whr-n ho purposed to bring down the Railways Statement. The Hon. J. A, Millar said ho would bring it down as kiou as it was ready. It might be ready in a day or two. Mr. Herdman asked whether the Railways Statement would bo brought down before the Financial Debate. Mr. Massey pointed out that this was tho usual course. Sir Joseph AA r ard said that in order to facilitate matters he would defer the Financial Statement until next Fridav and in the meantime the Railways Statement would be brought down.