Grey River Argus SATURDAY, January 14, 1928. BRITISH LABOUR’S COAL POLICY.

Grey River Argus, 14 January 1928, Page 4

Grey River Argus SATURDAY, January 14, 1928. BRITISH LABOUR’S COAL POLICY.

The report this week cabled that the Labour Party in Britain is expected this month to adopt a new policy for the solution of the coal problem is of more than ordinary interest, seeing that it is likely to meet with a better reception outside Labour circles than Labour’s previous scheme to nationalise the tindustry. The principal idea is to buy out the four thousand odd owners of coal and mineral royalties. No doubt the prospect of shekels will appeal more to them than confiscation. The royalties were valued seven or eight years ago at about seventy millions. The plan which a group of Labourites have now advanced to Mr Ramsay MacDonald provides for the issue of bonds by the State to the public for the huge sum of £260.000,000. After three years, £16.000,000 of the total would be payable annually as dividends, whilst the profits for the first three years would be used to unify the industry and to restore the seven hour day. The scheme, therefore, is quite in accord with the recommendations of the Samuel Commission, which was the last one to inquire into the industry, and which, while it reported

against the nationalisation of control, favoured national ownership of coal itself, which is the same thing as making the royalties State property. Furthermore, the Samuel Commission’s recommendation as to control is included in the new Labour proposals, namely. for the appointment by the Government of a Mining Corporation consisting of ten member-, and including business men, coal owners, and trade unionist leaders. These would control the whole national industry, and by making amalgamations in the ownership of mines or of groups of mines, -would unify the industry, and thus facilitate the standardisation of wages, conditions and regulations. The Corporation would work in conjunction with a Consumers’ Council, and each member’s salary would be £lO- - a year. Parliament -would each year discuss the policy and action of the Corporation. One object of unification is illustrated, for instance, in Ihe recent settingup by the Minister of Labour of an Industrial Transference Board, to facilitate the transfer of workers, and particularly miners, for whom opportunities of employment are no longer available in their own district. There are among the 1,330,000 odd unemployed at present in Britain a very large proportion of miners, though the increase of the total by over 230,000 since Christmas is accounted for by the sacking after the holidays of town workers engaged merely for the busy season. The worst areas of distress among Britain’s workless at present are the mining areas of Durham, Northumberland, South Wales and the north-east coast of England; in the coal, iron, steel and other heavy industries. It is partly to mitigate this distress, no doubt, that the Labour Parly has decided to compromise on the nationalisation issue. A scheme almost similar to this one had been proposed years ago by the Liberal Tarty, which suggested the use of Treasury bonds for the purchase of royalties, the bomls being chargeable on the rc’-'enue which the State would receive in royalties, of which, however, a tenth would go to raise the miners’ standard of living, and a Royalty Commission would unify the industry. It is stated that this scheme has of late been given consideration by the miners in several areas. There can be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable person that private ownership of coal should cease, but there may be objection raised when it is proposed to pay such a sum as the present royalty holders might demand The transfer of ownership would be naturally the first step towards complete national control, for if it were demonstrated that the Mining Corporation which the State set up could, sue.cessfully control the industry for private capitalists, the fact of the industry itself changing ownership could not be considered likely to render the Commission anywise less capable of successful "ontrol. When, however, it would come to buying out the coal companies, the bond issue necessary would he far greater than that now suggested in the case of the royalty. However, the Labourites may be wiser than might first appear in stopping at national ownership of coal without nationalising coni-01, because, however valuable the deposits, the industry is approaching a. stage when radical changes in the use of coal are probable, and thus the capitalists, if they were Io get their price, might receive more by far than the industry is worth. It is probable very many of the royalty owners would be glad to sell. Probably, too, if there were a sale, they would get a better price than their present prospects warrant. That is the bait; no doubt. They would be disposed to take tne bonds when these would mean a State guarantee of interest on their capitalised holdings, and no worry over the hitches in production. If it serves no other immediate purpose, the proposal will illustrate for the public just what a toll the rolalty owners take from the coal trade.