MEASURE ATTACKED

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 148, 19 December 1929, Page 9

MEASURE ATTACKED

NOTHING FOR PRODUCTION

SUBSIDISING INEFFICIENCY

United Press Association—By Electric Tele-

graph—Copyright.

LONDON, 17th December. In the House of Commons.Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister (C.) congratulated the Government on breaking the rash election pledge to repeal the Eight Hours Act. He said that it was better to break a pledge than an industry. Everyone would be glad to reduce hours if the efficiency of the industry wa,s not reduced. As a result of the Eight Hours Act the cost of coal per ton fell from 17s 2d in 1926 to 13s in 1929, while wages only dropped from 10s 4|d per shift to 9s 2a. The so-called marketing scheme was only another name for a price-fixing ring, without safeguards to the consumer. The scheme did nothing 'for production or efficient marketing, but was an inducement to the industry to raise prices without economising. LIBERAL CONTENTION. = ; ; Sir Herbert Samuel. (L.) said" that the Liberals had no quarrel regarding the reduction of hours. Over the greater part of Britain the hours worked underground were longer than in most European mines. He approved of the attempts to get back to the seven hours' day in two stages and the' combined national industrial board, aa recommended by the Royal Commission. The crux of the matter was the failure to insist on consolidation, with a view to reducing the number of producing units. Did the Government intend to to force the amalgamation effectively to control prices in the interests of the public? The Bill created vested interests in small inefficient mines and taxed Britain in coal prices for the benefit of foreigners. Sir Herbert Samuel regretted that he was forced to attack the Bill. He had expected the Government to introduce a Bill in which the Liberals might have co-operated. QUESTION OF PRICES. Mr. Graham said that the British prewar coal output was worth 290 millions sterling, which in recent years had fallen to 245 or 250 millions. There had been some decline in the home demand, but the most important drop was in exports. Before the • war Britain exported So to 87 millions' worth a year, but now she was finding difficulty in exporting 50 to 55 millions' worth. Even this trade was carried on unremuneratively. Referring to the Liberal amendment, Mr. Graham said that he thought he could remove the majority of the difficulties, but he did not propose any subsidy. The Bill only sought to enable the trade to compete with the European price. Their opponents liad said the Government was proposing to increase coal prices 4 s to 5s a ton. If this was true, then the Government deserved to bo driven from office. This would only lead to the consumption of oil fuels and other coal substitutes.