TRADIHG PROFITS

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 108, 9 May 1941, Page 5

TRADIHG PROFITS

USE BY COUNCIL

ELECTRICITY FUNDS

. "Itis/amusing to seethat the Mayor .:. lhas to go right back to 1931 to bolster , up his case for the present election," Bald Mr. R. McKeen, M.P. Labour canMdidate for, the Mayoralty, last night, *.yhen replying to statements made by Mr. Hislop regarding the use of electricity profits. "It only serves to emphasise the weakness of his case when he has to fumble round in musty old files in order that he can put me on the mat. "However, since he has raised the point, lam entitled to reply to it. Mr..' Hislop says that I was against the proposal to take, £ 10,000 from the electricity profits iin 1931, on the grounds that those profits should,be utilised for reducing charges to the consumers, .and he'quotes a newspaper report to that effect At that time I and other councillors, were against the principle of raiding V the profits because ? the charges then were much higher • than they - are today, and I felt that the •people who used the •electricity were justly to any-benefit they • cpuld get but; of- the profits, of that .; / , ■ ■ CHARGES COMPARED. <'In 1931, and prior to that year, electricity charges were very. high. For instance, private lighting cost 5d a unit - rand heating Id a-unit. Today the rates are 3d and £d respectively. Also in 1931 commercial powers and heating charges ranged from -6d a unit down io 3d a unit, subject to .a 10 per cent, rebate; today those charges range from 3d,for the first 400 units down to l|d' fo> the balance. From those figures it 'is obvious that: the position .today is, ■ vastly different from what it was ten long years ago.; Today we have -the lowest charges possibly in the world, and I feel sure that consumers would not object to the profits being ear- ' marked for tepid baths in the way I have suggested. ■ • '"Let me add that the profits of the electricity department during the years 1928 to 1931 inclusive totalled £175,465, and instead of going to benefit the consumers, £45,000 was used for street works, which should have been paid, for out of revenue, while the actual concession to the consumer, sout of that huge profit was only £40,000."