LESSONS OF BRITISH COAL INQUIRY

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 218, 9 June 1919, Page 8

LESSONS OF BRITISH COAL INQUIRY

PROBLEM OF NATIONALISATION' AS LABOUR VIEWS IT COLLECTIVE PRODUCTION (By "A Labour Correspondent" of Hie London "Observer."). Labour has no occasion to feel dissatisfied with the Coal Commission, even if only because its proceedings have trained the public attention on to serious industrial questions. Tho gradual day-by-day publication of evidence bearing upon the coal-mines, -their mnnngement and profits, and upon the wider questions involved, has proved a valuable piece of education to the general public, whose knowledge of the economic machine and its workings is of tho flimsiest kind. One of tho most important features of tho proceedings has been tho insistence of the Labour croup on the human as distinct from the narrow economic view of tho question of wages and hours. The case of the employers in resisting tho claims for tho 30 per cent, increase and the reduction of the working day to six hours has rested upon the impossibility of meeting competition and tho burden which will fall upon the consumer jif the miners' demands are conceded. 'The "Westminster Gazette" was full of wrath ngainst Mr. Smillie for wasting time by asking a prosperous* accountant how he would like to live on .£2OO a year, lint that question goes to the very root of tli'oe problem. What tho miners wish to burn into the minds of the public is the rightful claim of tho colliery workers, in view of their humanity and the arduous and dangerous character of their' calling, to a greater share of tho nation's wealth than they have enjoyed in the past. A royalty of sixpence a ton is paid to those who 'personally contribute nothing to the production of coal, and who share none of the dangers of tho miner. Yet if the miner asked'for tho equivalent of sixpence a ton his demand would be mot by a. statement of tho effect it would have upon steel prices! When, however, witnesses' were ' a6ked point-blank to,''choose between economic gnin and tho welfare of the miners they were bound, to admit that the latter was of the greater consequence. One result of the Commission has been io bring homo wliat may be called the moral aspect of. ths miners' claims.

Foreign Competition. In the next place, the employers' case' against the proposed increase in wages and reduction of hours is certainly not'' proved. Neither can it be said that the workers' side of the commission has proved its contentious, but'in this case the matter is bound up with the question of nationalisation. The employers'- witnesses have, of course, played the card of foreign competition, and urged that the concession of the miners' demands will involve an incref.so in the price of coal which must render it impossible to compote in the world's markets.. Their argument is based on the assumption that existing standards of efficiency—and inefficiency—on the part of colliery proprietors will continue, and on tho further assumption that America, which is our chief rival, will also continue to sell at present prices. In brief, the employers' case rest* upon, tho fallacy that all other economic cbnilitions_at home and abroad are static and luat only labour is dynamic. The employees' side of the' commission has suggested that America labour conditions are not static, that tho American coal miners aim at a progressive improvement in wages and hours, that there are possibilities- of introducing considerable economies in the production of coal and in the cost of distribution. They have pointed out that the reduction of hours will not necessarily be followed by an equivalent reduction of output. They have urcred that the reduction of hours in the Durham coalfield wa6 not attended by the conseouences which were feared. Aiid thouirh it is obviously fallacious to assume that production will be maintained with every diminution of hours, it is unsafe to predict that in the case of mines the limit has been reached. Mr. Kmillie reminded a witness that the abolition of-the labour of young children in mines was opposed on (lie ground that it would ruin the industry—an which has been laid against a good many legislative proposals in the past. Sir Richard Eedniayne's conjecture that a reduction of 25 per cent., in the hours of labour in mines will mean a diminution in-production of 21 per cent, is based upon hypotheses which may or may not be sound. . ,

. Then, apain. the Labour Commissioners have empha«ised-and' the public has come to understand—the fact that tho price of coal is not based upon the cost of producing it in the hest. or even tho average mines, hut upon the expense of producing it in tho worst mines at. work. In 'other words, the nrice of coal is largely determined by the poor mine and the inefficiently managed mine. The consumer is therefore paying a toll to certain pits which are making large nrouw. fan the community resist the claim _of the miners whilst ,it allows excessive gains to some mines because of the Ui»h Co=(: of production in others? Tho miners' case regarding wa?es and hours is, of course, bound up with nationalisation, to which reference is made below. /

Tho Two Cases. Taking the claims of two sides, it would seem that no clear, conclusion can be drawn. On the one hand, if is urged lluibto agree to the miners' demands will Ire lo raise prices and therefore to penalise our foreigu trade in coal and injure our industries which depend upon coal. This view is supported by a nummer of hypotheses of varying degrees of validity, but. which do not appear to take sufficient account of the possible improvements in organisation and production. On the other hand, the Labour members of the commission insist that there ore sources of inefficiency to be eliminated, new developments to be made, and unnecessary tribute to lie abolished, which will enable the mining industry to meet tile' new claims of the Miners' Federation. The miners clearly do not wish to destroy tho industry by which they live, and they are as emphatic in contending that their claims can be met as the capitalist representatives are in assorting that they cannot be. But ns tho problem is one of forecasting the future, there can be no proof that either side is right. Time alone will tell..

The Cry of Ruin. There is, however, this (o be said for the Labour case—that the cry of rpin has frequently been raised in tho pAst in our staple industries what appeared to be' far-reaching proposals were Drought forward, but the gloomy prophecies made have- fortunately proved mistaken.- Moreover, the motive of pri'.vato gain, fls the evidence has made clear, has not stimulated the mining industry to that degree of progressive development which is undoubtedly possible, whilst the steady pressure of the miners towards lusrher standards of living and hotter conditions will compel progress and efficiency. On balance, Labour men, regarding tho evidence given before the commission, are satisfied that a good case has been made by tho Labour representatives, though absolute proof is in tho nature of the question, impossible. The publio has been placed in possession of a whole series of facts relating to the coal mines. It hns realised something of tho conditions under which the r.nlliers work; it has learnt that although the miner bus a statutory eight-hour day his actual hours of employment are longer; ik has come to appreciate the waate inherent in the present system and the possibilities which lie before co-ordin-ated organisation and an enlightened policy of development. The result has been that tho general body of pe'onlo. whose prejudices probably led Ihein, 'before the inquiry, to an attitude of hostility towards the miners demands, are now much more inclined to look with sympathy upon them. i

Lessons for tho Public. Another result of the Commission has undoubtedly been to awaken a new interest in industrial problems. Peoples eyes have been opened to facts which hitherto the secrecy of employers has defended from tho public gaze. A stimulus has been given to further inquiry along the same lines. Tho coal mining industry is a less efficient service than it. should bo; the arbitrariness of the profit.-, gained hns ken brought out in a way

which has impressed the public mind. There, is a natural tendency to wonder whether other industries are not equally open to criticism and whether it would not bo a'distinct national advantage to bring a healthy spirit of inquiry into certain of the great staple trades of the country. There is a new determination to find out the real facts regarding industry, and the Coal Commission may well prove- to be the first of a series ot commissions into the services rendered by various industries and the price paid by the community for those services. 'Lastly, the evidence produced befoifi the Commission and the admissions rands by witnesses have shown conclusively the need for unification in the coal-rnin-ing industry. The waste and inefficiency attendant upon individual ownership have been proved up to the hilt. Sir Richard Rcdmayne, in his evidence before the Commissioners, said: "That the present system of individual ownership of colliorics is extravagant and wasteful, wlie. tlicr viewed from the point of view of the coal-mine industry as a whole or from the national point of view, is, I think Generally accepted." Ho pointed out the advantages which would result, from collective production-greater output, diminished costs, and the prevention ot waste. These advantages would be secured by the' prevention of competition, ending to bettor selling prices for exported coal, th(. control of freight, economy of administration by curtailment of, mammenal ex. penses, the provision of capital allowing ot quicker and more expansive development Of backward mines, tho more advantageous purchase of materials and the reduction of colliery consumption, which is very high in some mines.

"Collective Production," The facts which the Commissioners have extracted from witnesses have filled for ever the.conception of the mining industry as a number of isolated and independent collieries. This lesson has surely been made clear already, though the Commission has not as yet really turned its attention to the tuture of Hie coal mining industry. The public mind is now prepared for "collective production " The need for unification of control is being generally admitted. The question which presumably tho Commissioners will begin seriously to consider nfter the publication of their interim report a few days henca is the form which unification should take. The mine-own-ers are clearly unprepared to sign their own death warrants. The Labour .representatives are unanimously in favour of nationalisation. The issue he* between a trust, subject perhaps to State regulation, but nevertheless under private ownership and management, and national ownership of the mines. There can bo no middle course. The suggestion that the miners should co-operate with tho present owners m the management of the mines has been definitely, repudiated bv Mr. Frank Hodges as an alliance with the shareholders which we do not regard as practicable or desirable." So far as tho Commission has gone the evidence is on the whole more favourable than not, to nationalisation. But however that may be, ono effect _ of the Commission • has .been to bring people's minds to a consideration of tho problem of nationalisation.