BRITISH POLITICS.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 December 1929, Page 6

BRITISH POLITICS.

COAL BILL. (United Presß Association. —By Electric Telegrapn.—Copyright.) LONDON, December 17. 51 r Ramsay 51acI)anald, in tho House of Commons, said that he could not accept the Federation dl British Industries’ advice to postpone the second reading of the Coal Bill. The Conservative Party to-night gave notice for a straight-out motion .for the rejection of the Coal Bilk The Unemployment Insurance Bill passed its third reading by 273 votes to 199 in the House of Commons. “If the Labour Party is allowed to have its way, this powerful country will be converted into a vast soup kitchen,” said Air Winston Churchill, in a speech at a Conservative lunch at London. “The House of Commons is to-day voting upon more and better doles. To-morrow it will consider a jolly plan for dearer coal, in order to placate the miners, who hold the Government in their bands. ‘Tired Tim’ and ‘Weary Willie’ will go on smoking their pipes until a job is brought to them like a titbit in a plate. The country must pay the price for all this. America, Germany and Franco are reducing taxation in order to improve their world-trading capacity, but the British Government lias committed the country to a further twenty millions sterling expenditure.

IN THE COSIMOXS

LONDON, Dec. 17

In tho Commons, SIV Graham in answer to a question admitted since tho introduction of the motor tyre duty iin 1927, five foreign tyre making factories had been established in Britain, employing fifty-five thousand men.

Mr Snowden, replying to a question, said in the financial statement to be presented before the recess it was not intended to announce the Government’s specific intentions regarding the McKenna Safeguarding Duties.

slr Trevelyan introduced a Bill increasing the school leaving age to fifteen, and providing a maintenance allowance for children over fourteen. The Bill was read a first time.

GOVERNMENTS LOCAL BILL (British Official Wireless). RUGBY, Dec. 17. In the House of Commons, slr Graham moved a second reading of the Coal s!ines Bill. Ho said that he was satisfied, from contact with many of the highest experts in the coal industry, that if there were some kind of order in the industry, instead of chaos, this country would win its Way back in the European markets, not perhaps to the extent that it enjoyed before the war, but to some extent. This Bill provided for the setting up of inter-District or National Scheme of slarketing, for the purpose of co-ordin-ating the district schemes. 'lbis national scheme was representative of the owners in all of the coal areas of Britain. It was the duty of this national body to arrive at what, in their view, was the aggregate British demand for coal, or the amount of coal, over a reasonabde period, which could be sold at a remunerative level, and then .they would make an allocation to the different districts of the country in the terms of what those districts had been doing. Part of the criteism of the Bill had been directed to the levy which, as the Bill provided, could lie made by the central body upon the District Boards for the purpose of facilitating the sale of coal for export The object was to enable the coal industry of Great Britain to compote, at the world price, which, for this purpose, was the European price. Tl was not proposed to subsidise coal in the ordinary sense. With regard to the reduction of the miners’ hours irom eight to seven and a-lialf, lie said that, with goodwill this could be met without any reduction of wages. Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister (Conservative) moved the rejection of the Bill.

PRICE-FI XING OPPOSED. LONDON, Dec. 17. In moving his motion against the Coal Bill 5 Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister con-* gratulated the- Government on breaking its rash election pledge to repeal the Eight Hours Act. He said that it was, lietter to break the coal industry. Everyone would lie glad to reduce the miners’ hours if the efficiency of the industry would not be reduced. Sir P. Cunliffe Lister said that as the result of the Eight Hours’ Act. the cost per ton of coal fell from I7s 2d in 1926 to 13s in 1929, while the wages only dropped from 10s 4;[d to 9s 2d. Sir P. Cunliffe Lister declared that the so-called marketing scheme was only another name for a price-fixing ring, without any safeguards to the consumer. The scheme did nothing for production or for efficient marketing, hut it was an inducement to the industry to raise tho prices without economising. A LIBERAL’S ATTITUDE. LONDON, Dec. 17. Tn the. House of Commons, Sir H. Samuel (Liberal) said that the Liberal Party had no quarrel regarding the reduoion of the miners’ hours. Over me greater part of Britain the hours that were worked underground were longer than those in most of the European mines. He approved of the attempts to get back the seven hours’ day in two stages. lie also approved

of the proposal for a Board, which wa« i >oiiimonded by the Royal Coal Commission. T lie crux of the matter was that there wa.s a failure to insi t on the , nsolidation of the industry with :i vie,v to reducing the number of Lire- producing units. Did the Government he asked, intend to force amalgamations and effectively to control prices in the interests of the public? This Bill created vested interests in small and inefficient mines, and it taxed Britain in the coal prices for the benefit of foreigners. Sir H. Samuel said lie regretted that lie was forced to attack the Bill. He had expected the Government to introduce a Bill in which the Liberals ''might haye co-operated. AIMS OF BILL. 'jO REGAIN OVEREAS 51AEKETS. LONDON, Dec. 17. In the House of Commons, Mr Graham said that the British pre-war coal output was worth 290 millions sterling, which in recent years had fallen to 245 to 250 millions. There had been some decline in the Home demand, but the most important drop was in the-'exports. Before the war, Britain exported from 85 to 87 million pounds worth of coal yearly, but now she was finding a difficulty in exporting from 50 to 55 million pounds worth. Even this trade was carried on unremuneratively. Referring to a Liberal amendment, lie said, he thought that lie could remove the majority of the difficulties, but lie would not propose any subsidy. Tho bill only sought to enable tho trade to compete with the European price. Their opponents lmd said that tho Government was proposing to increase the coal prices by 4s to 5s per ton. If this were-true, then the Government deserved to be driven from office. This would only lead to the consumption of oil fuels and •other coal substitutes.