THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1905. STATE COAL FIASCO.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12930, 28 July 1905, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1905. STATE COAL FIASCO.

The result of the embarkation of the Government in the coal-mining business will help to cure the colony of the delusion that an Act of Parliament and an item on the Appropriations are sufficient to establish a profitable' and flourishing State industry. For Mr. ■ Seddon's adventure into State coal mining has not only led to the practical loss of the national capital thus rashly invested, but lias completely failed to satisfy those for whose benefit, it is now officially, asserted, the untimely departure was made. Replying to the complaints of that staunch Government supporter, Mr. R. McKenzie, the Minister for Mines asserted that the Seddonville State mine "was, taken up mainly in order to give employment to a large number of men who were out of work in live district." With the usual casuistry of our Cabinet Ministers Mr. McGowan subsequently attempted to persuade the House that he had said " partly," not "mainly," but the time has gone by when either the House or the country accepts meekly such Ministerial explanations. It is evident that under the plea of being able to supply coal at a cheap rate for industrial purposes and household consumption and of generally forcing down prices by thus breaking the alleged " combine," Mr. Seddon really aimed at further pampering of his pet West Coast by lavishing public money in that favoured region. But though it is easy enough to squander money on either railways or mines, it is very much more difficult to conduct either a railway or a mining industry upon profitable lines when the simplest axioms of business are ignored in the initiation. So that we have at Seddonville an indifferent State mine that is grossly mismanaged, and a costly railway (hat is only "interest-producing" on paper, while the miners for whom this raid on the colonial exchequei is now .admitted to have been %iade—only in order to keep them in the district, and to prevent them from migrating to better fields—eke out a hand-to-mouth existence with just enough employment to keep body and soul together. We do not doubt that somebody has profited by the heavy expenditure which has attached to this miserable and mismanaged adventure, but it is certainly not the miners—who would have done far better in other parts of the colony and as certainly not the general public, whose connection with this vaunted State coal industry has been confined to providing the money wherewith to keep it dragging along.

A noticeable feature of the revelations being made in this connection is that they do not come through members of the Opposition, but mainly through members who sit on the' Government benches. Mr. Hogg,

in seconding the Addrcss-in-Beply, emphatically denied the assert.on made in the Governor's Speech, that, contentment and happiness obtain everywhere," and quoted the condition of the State coal miners among his illustrations to the contrary. He made a drastic criticism upon what he termed the failure of the Minister for Mines to do his duty, and compared the energy displayed in the development of private coal mining with the lethargy and inefficiency of the administrative system. It is hardly necessary to say that it did not occur.to Mr. Hogg that this inefficiency of , industrial management is inseparable from officialism wherever individuality and initiative are factors in the making of success. And he assumed, with the trusting confidence of the partisan, that the purpose of Mr. Seddon's State coal mines was to produce coal cheaply "for the benefit of our young industries, to help the manufacturer and the artisan, and to assist the people in our cities who are dependent on coal for their warmth and light." This was, of course, the platform reason. But the real reason—as revealed by our Auckland member, the Minister for Mines—was to spend public money on the West Coast, and stop the West Coast miners from drifting up to our Auckland coalfields. Concerning which feature of the notorious administrative policy, we would remind our readers that while such large sums have been spent on the West Coast for this improper purpose, our Auckland mines have frequently had to stop work, because the Railway Department does not provide sufficient trucks to carry their coal from pit-mouth to port. The carrying of Auckland-mined coal is as profitable to the national railways as the mining of it is remunerative to our Auckland miners, and the marketing of it in ample quantities advantageous to the Auckland coal consumers. Yet we are heavily taxed, to make good the loss on this Seddonville fiasco, by a Government which blocks the development of an Auckland coal industry, that costs the State not a penny, pays Arbitration Court wages out of earnings, and only needs better distributive methods to reduce charges to the consumer.

Even the Government, with an election near 'at hand, has recognised that the state of affairs at Seddonvillc and Point Elizabeth cannot be defended, for the Mines Department has not only grossly mismanaged the mine, but has avoided the only part of the coal business which it could hope to carry on automatically, that of distribution. There is comparatively little difficulty experienced by the State in selling a stamp over a counter, and one can conceive that no greater intellect is required to sell a bag of coal at a railway yard. But while the complex and varying work of mining has been rashly undertaken at Seddonville and Point Elizabeth—simply as an excuse for spending money on the West Coast— simple and automatic work of selling it has been thrust aside. The public begins to feel interested in the question, and less inclined to be deluded by meaningless promises of future benefits, and at election time the public is not to be altogether denied. Consequently, the Government has shrewdly decided upon an inquiryafter a commission of inquiry had been demanded by the Seddonville Miners' Union. But what is the Government's idea of " inquiry 1" They have appointed a "board," consisting of Departmental officials, in order to report upon the work of ' the Department, from which " board" the only unofficial member, the president of the Miners' Union, promptly /withdrew when the dominant official element decided to exclude the press. Comment is unnecessary. Mr. McKenzie's motion j for a Parliamentary Committee of investigation is a notification to the Cabinet that its tactics are estranging some of its staunchest supporters. We shall see how many of our members vote for this motion, and how many endorse the "whitewashing" board set up to cloak the vagaries of the Department in the matter of State coal mines.