COAL PROFITS

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 89, 12 October 1923, Page 8

COAL PROFITS

TO THI BDIIOK.

Siiy-In your issue of Bth October, Mr. Bishop stated; "(1) That his statement of 6th OctofcTlftaSSLS* Wh°le fieM °£ -^

"(2) That Pukemiro was 'one caee winch is the unique exception among ™v min"ig companies.' ' When I pointed out another company also making large profits, he says • 'Mr. Nash prefers to taken "one or two instances which happen to serve his purpose, and to entirely ignore all other cases. The two companies I have quoted mine more coal than any other four companies in the Dominion. Their output last year was as follows:_ •/ Pukemiro 138,941 tons. \V estport V 442,934 tons. 581,865 tons. The total output for the. Dominion was 1,857,819 tons.: The. State mines' output was 123,531 tons, leaving a net return for the Co-operative and Proprietary companies of 1,734.288 tons, so that the two companies I have mentioned control one-third of the total output By his statement in Saturday's "Evening Post," Mr. Bishop conveyed to the public the information that the mineowners were making a dividend of 4 8 per cent. He based these figures on a report four yearg ago, which dealt with conditions dnring the five previous years. When a case .of. 74 pe r cent profit and 35 per cent, dividend is pointed out, he says it is "unique." When another case' of 12* p OT cent, dividend, with good reserves, is quoted, he says, "one or two cases." He has the whole of the figures. Why not make the whole of the balance-sheets public?—l am, etc., W. NASH. ' National Secretary, N.Z.L.P. 9th October.

The secretary of the Mine Owners' Federation, Mr. T. O. Bishop, comments thus upon the above letter: "The real question at issue on the West Coast is whether or not the miners are to be permitted to put into operation a go-slow policy, with the object of forcing the mine owners to depart from the terms and conditions of the Arbitration Court's award. Any other questions are irrelevant to the ißsue, and statements such as those of Mr. Nash and Mr. Peter Fraser are evading the main question."