RED OR BLACK ?

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17352, 17 May 1924, Page 2

RED OR BLACK ?

) NATIONALISATON OF THE * MINES. BILL REJECTED IN HOUSE OF COMMONS. I By Telegraph—j Reuter s Telegrams. J (Received Mav 17. 12.45 p.m.' ! ( LONDON, May 16. I i Nationalisation of th© mines was dis- } ! cussed in the House of Commons when I a Labour member. Mr George Hall, ) moved the second reading of the Na- j tionalisation of Mines Rill, providing i for the transferences of mines and min- ; crals to a Mining Council of 20 members, 10 to be appointed by the Crown, and 10 by the Miners’ Federation under the Minister of Mines appointed by

the Crown. The Bill provides for the purchase of the mines, but not for the payment of royalties, for which no compensation will be given. Mr Hall stated that there were six ; persons drawing royalties of over • £500.000 yearly. This was more than : 3500 miners received. i Mr Samuel Roberts. Conservative, i moved tor the rejection of the Bill, tie instanced cases where nationalisation had resulted in losses, including shipping and railways—railways in Canada, and shipping in Australia and South Africa. Mr Roberts declared that the British coal export trade had enormously increased under private enterprise. The Bill proposed was a- leap in the dark and a rash and disastrous experiment. Sir Beddoe Rees, Liberal, seconded the rejection motion. Mr E. Shinwell said that while recognising that the country had not given a mandate for the nationalisation of the mines, the Government wholeheartedly accepted the principle of the Bill. Mr Lloyd George, who was repeatedly interrupted by Labour members, declared that the profits went back to the industry and the losses were taken out of the public funds. This was a new kind of socialism. It was not nationalisation. but a gigantic coal trust, such as Sir Sidney Webb had denounced as a “ black tiger. The only difference was that a Bill had created a “ red , tiger.” He agreed that mining condiI tions were most unsatisfactory, and was • sure the House would not examine in ( a partisan spirit any broad-minded proI posal to improve the miners’ lot. The second reading of the Bill was rejected by 264 votes to 168. The Liberal vote was split.