New Bill Aims At Public Ownership Of Coal Resources

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26849, 13 August 1948, Page 5

New Bill Aims At Public Ownership Of Coal Resources

P.A. WELLINGTON, Aug. 12. Apart from the moral justice of restoring to the people the ownership of coal measures which should never have been alienated there were urgent reasons for rectifying past mistakes, declared the Minister of Mines, Mr McLagan, moving the second reading of the Coal Bill in the House of' Representatives to-night. - ?

The Minister said that the Bill’s chief purpose was to transfer the ownership of coal measures and certain rights appertaining, to them from private to public ownership. It was now widely recognised that the coal resources should have remained under public ownership. That was the attitude of the Royal Commission appointed in Britain in 1925.

Although composed entirely of Conservatives and Liberals with a bias for private enterprise, that commission favoured the public ownership of coal measures. The desirability of this principle had also been recognised in this country. The Bill would complete the correction pt an error made in times past. It provided for the resumption of the public ownership of coal supplies, with compensation for the present owners.

Two reasons made this step urgent, said the Minister. First, the prodigal waste of coal seams which had occurred under private ownership; and. secondly, more detailed and efficient prospecting in recent years had shown that New Zealand’s coal resources were much smaller than once supposed. making the need for conserving the coal still left greater than ever.

There had been much exploitation of coal seams in the past. Mines had been laid out without adequate prospecting to determine the real extent of the coal seams or their inclination. In the not very distant past one mine was laid out with practically no prospecting of coal beforehand. By chance, development was started in the right direction, but before the main seam was feached the opening was turned at right angles. This happened again and yet again before coal was encountered. The result of this initial mistake, which saved money in initial prospecting, but cost a hundredfold later, was that the company eventually went bankrupt and the mine went out of production. In a desire for quick profits, drives in some mines were made too wide and the pillars were too small and removed before they should.,be. These mistakes meant eventual heavy losses in coal and money. In other instances the wrong coal was taken first, resulting in flooding, which compelled the mines to be abandoned. Fires following avoidable falls of coal also caused heavy losses. Quick Profits

Mr McLagan said the.Millerton mine, operated by the Westport Coal Company, was a typical example of a mine in which much more coal would have been recovered had the company not been concerned with quick profits. The Blackball mine was one in which, through removal of the wrong coal first, flooding occurred, leading eventually to the abandonment of the mine.

Mr McLagan said the- MiUerton mine had certainly yielded profits, but its extraction rate had been only about 30 per cent, of the available coal. To the end of 1946 it'had yielded 9,280,000 tons, but in getting that amount the company lost for all time more than 21,000,000 tons. “That is not contested by the company; they have admitted it in my presence,” said the Minister. The Denniston mine, with one of the best quality seams in New Zealand, yielded 12,250,000 tons to the end of 1946, but considerably more than that was lost in the process. The Minister said this figure was based on calculations which were not merely theoretical. It was possible to measure fairly exactly what amount of coal had been available in a mine. Mr McLagan said that although the Blackball mine was worked for 50 years before the company abandoned it, the amount of coal irretrievably lost in it was much more than the 4,420,000 tons extracted to the end of 1946. Wasted Coal Professor James Park, a well-known geologist, in 1910 said large quantities of coal were being wasted, and he urged supervision by engineers in the State employ. In 1919 the Industries Committee of the House, comprising five Reform, five Liberal, one Independent, but no Labour members, urged nationalisation of the coal measures to prevent waste. Mr McLagan observed that it might be said the evidence he had quoted was of the year 1919 and earlier, but the 1940 report on the Southland coalfield referred to the way the extraction rate of roal had been endangered by maipractifce. Tremendous quantities of valuable coal had been left behind and could not be worked. There was a strong case for the resumption of mineral rights where they were not held by the Crown. The Reefton report stated that the methods adopted were wasteful and extravagant. The writer of that report was the secretary of the Coalmine Owners’ Association of New Zealand who was giving evidence on the appalling wastage of coal resulting from the mining methods adopted byprivate enterprise. Coal had been worked and treated and wasted as if it, were inexhaustable with the most appalling disregard for the interests of the nation, continued the Minister. The need for the conservation of coal had been seen long ago by people who were qualified to express such opinions. Goal Resources

New Zealand’s proved coal resources to-day were 300,000,000 tons, of which 14,000,000 tons was bituminous, and the probable coal available was 537,000,000 tons, which included 56.000,000 tons of bituminous coal. That made 72,000,000 tons of bituminous coal which was all that was in sight at present, though further prospecting might reveal more.

The Leader of the Opposition, JVIr Holland, said the whole of the Minister’s case had been founded on the alleged wrongs of private owners in working .coal mines, yet no clause in the Bill had anything to do with the working of coal.

There was not a single fault mentioned by the Minister which could not be corrected by ordinary legislation and good administration. No case had been made by the Minister to show that a change of ownership would pui these things right. It was generally agreed that coal was vital to New Zealand’s economy and that the Dominion had insufficient for her requirements. There was a duty on any Government to conserve resources, to see that coal was not wasted, and that seams were efficiently worked. Alternating Approach

It was generally recognised to-day that the public welfare took precedence over private interests'. This had been applied to legislation on the resources of hydro-electric power and oil, but the question as far as the present Bill was concerned was: Did it offer the best possible approach to the problem of conserving coal, or was there an alternative which was preferable?

Mr Holland said the Bill provided for complete nationalisation of the coal resources, and when State ownership of coal had been established the process could be quickly completed. Coal could be worked only under licence, and the Government could issue licences to whom it pleased or could withhold them at will to complete the nationalisation of the industry. Mr Holland said there was an alternative to the present measure. There was a great need to-day for improved methods in coal mining. The "test was: Could more, better and cheaper coal be produced by the present Bill? Might it not be anticipated that similar Bills would be presented to nationalise the timber land of the country, the agricultural lime industry, the cement works, and stone quarries? The next thing would be a Bill to nationalise land.