PRICE OF COKE

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 85, 10 April 1935, Page 6

PRICE OF COKE

MOVE FOR INCREASE

SOME STRONG COMMENT

A iiolk'i! of motion by Mr. D. W. Campbell, "That with a view to providing Jluhmcl' .for works maintenance, the price of coke bo Increased by 5s per loi;, llic sold increase to take place .from April 1, 1035," gave rise to some sluirjj exchanges of opinion at the meetini; of the Pulune and Lower Hutt Gas Lighting Board last evening. In Kponklng to tho motion, Mr. Campbell suicl he considered that in thn past the board had been selling coke'too ■cheaply. About 73J tons of coke v/as sold outside the borough, and nGs ineraisfi on this would give extra revenue of £18 17s 6d. The board was selling ita coke product 20 per cent, lower than its competitors. The increase in price to thfi dealers,would be only iibout 2d per bag. Dealers were now making a gross profit of about 50 per cent. The board's coke stocks were about ■ 100 per cent, down on what they were last year. There would be a greater demand this winter than ever. The increase would not be passed on to the local consumer, broadly speaking, for about 80 per cent, of I the purchasers of the coke were Wellington people. Money must be found for doing up the retorts, and this was a way. „ In reply to a question by ' Mr. A. Scholefleld, the secretary (Mr. O. Silbcry) said that the proportion of the sales of coke, comparing the putt Valley and Wellington, was about fiftyTlie chairman (Mr. W. G. Lodder) I stated emphatically that the board's ! prices for coke were not lower than the prices of its competitors; in fact, they were higher than the Wellington Gas Company's. He quoted figures to prove this. It seemed, he said, as if Mr. Campbell wanted the board to raise its prices so that the Wellington Gas Company could also raise its prices. Mr. Campbell: Where did you get those figures? Mr. Lodder: From the Wellington Gas Company. Mr. S. Clendon also took strong exception to Mr. Campbell's statements. Mr. W. G. Meldrum said that when the price of coke was raised on a previous occasion.the board made an error that should not be repeated. He spoke strongly against any increase. Mr. C. P. Brockelbank stated that the board was getting rid of its coke, and everyone appeared to be quite satisfied. He was riot in favour of raising the price. . Mr. Lodder again- stressed that it was a misstatement for Mr. Campbell to say that the board was selling coke 20 per cent, cheaper than its competitors, :. ■ '■,". :: .-■ '•: ": . \ ■■■■'-■ -':■'•■'■■ '; "There are -too many wrong statements," commented Mr. A, Scholefield. There was no . seconder ,f or Mr. Campbell's motion, which therefore lapsed. -.'■.■• -..■-' '■.■