THE COAL CRISIS.

Taihape Daily Times, 23 August 1919, Page 3

THE COAL CRISIS.

GOVERNMENT REPLY TO M-INERS Tum — WELLINGTON, Aug. 21. The Govcrllment, replying to the ieoal miners’ deputation, says it is necessary to ascertain as accurately as possible the employers’ profit in order to decide whether any increase in the cost of production should be legitimate'lly passed on to the public, or taken lfrom excess profits. The Government igsees no reason to doubt the accuracy Moi Mr Hight’S report, and this showed ; Jthat owners were only obtaining five ? per cent. In the G-over-nment’s opin- ' ion the increase cannot fairly be borne by. the owners. The deputation’s first'point was an objection to the conditions attached to the offer by owners that increases ir wages and contract prices should not apply to mines where agreements were in force, but those whose agreements had expired. In this the Government supDo}‘t the deputation, but does not ag'l'ee that the object of the - condition was to prevent operations of the national organisation of coalmin—l crs.~ ' The Government is unable to find evidence supporting "the deputation’s statement that the working conditions i‘.‘. the State mines are better than in other mines, as the State is charging loss. This only applies to household coal, and on it a loss is made For all I other -purposes the charge is the same ts agiii private mines. The GO‘.’wlil': ’ is in sympathy with the suggestion that héwers should not do trucking, except where -coal cannot be extracted under other conditions. "Mr Hampftcn had summarised the subject eniwhich the Cabinet was desii'ecl"to°’give consideration as follows: "’(1) miners entitled to a \vage ';e:c_iiial to =¥3_re—war conditions? ’"(2) Does ‘the employers’ offer bring ‘sagas to that standard. i "(_3)" If _'l‘io'; why not‘? ; _ is _tiiat‘:_le;g:is_l:atiApll last session -'empow— I the sigi-bitration Court to review} aridz‘ i*i3"xll{e‘cessal'y' raise wages to thei "T 'tllEart thl_e):_lCgo‘§v‘el'nliient considers the of- I nl;i‘&3‘;:tl.;(T;}"_§‘£t:’pl'o‘x:'es that the rm:-ti’ ' !Cdl"cE}.sJe.)s;__and_ the present offer do bring‘ I}:\£)age’sF}‘il)3et<g"‘the pre-war standard. ~..9‘:lj'Ji,£'fan’s‘\_}'ersto the third question isi etlikeareqtsfilioultl be no reason to pre—-_X‘£_‘£l‘lt?_§.l(?!‘§lll‘l'?offGCt_-“being given to the ‘ est aP9%si.°n- - i ~,.:_l;l_le,,‘,(w£ll_:c2le,,nlatter is then reduced} 10, the: q_ue,stinn as to whether the of— f ._ficia_.l, (‘ijtfat-.;.Cayll be fully accepted byf “both p,artios_ to the original dispute,"" and if,.not,.Vvlletllel' both parties can- , not agree to some met.ho"d of testing? ._,the,'a¢<;ec.uu,;;iey of that data. . .WHA_T fl‘-HE DEMANDS MEAN. ; ,COAL.§VOULD eosr £1 MORE J PER TON. I ,I.,nCl;he G'Cl.’\{Qlt'lllll’ellt, in the course Ofg ;',ep_}.y,.,to‘ the miners’ deputation”! ~a£te,r ¢.<};iS.Clg,s_Slill‘g the adequacy or in—i adgeqqagytofi miners’ wages to coveri .inCl}6B¢s§}s;(;pSi_}ru)Of living, proceeds to‘ <39,-tlr-..,;l§'i_tll_.,,i_2l-i._.en effect of~the demandsl .I_a}p§l'l_'l;‘t.llg,,Qllgbl.-ic. It says that the Go—; i,}’E§l'l}’ulU‘llt_3fiU'Ld,s!.a,fl‘Ol'll reliable estimates ' ;‘hatr,..t}le,f,Qf£'ei'; recently made by the} «I.;l,ille4Q(\V§l€;l‘§, and rejected by the min—. ea-sf,-¢§inyolvesl.a total increasr: in the} cost of .a.lel><.9,<luctioll of from £125,000! ,1-0._..£ I;3,t_);@_(.)[},-arid a consequent inereas- I cvdprioe ..per_—~ton of coal to the con-i snmerlzflfi from-2s to 3s. If all the de— 1 !i!l:3.ll€iS‘_l)l2lde.'rbY the miners were con-1' . ¢i'v3(i.3d’.;'s‘Qf‘! the ‘concluding six points I 1 ,‘provisi‘orlral'l-y waived by the miners,’ ii.’C‘.'GC.¥VCl‘lll'§lOllt finds the total inrrease I ' l’l the cost of production would be £2; { : (‘oo.ooo,‘alld‘tlle increase in the price per ton -to the consumer approxinlate- 5: of ‘2os. These‘ figures emphasise not 1 mcrel_y ‘ltll’&3*‘wide difference between "1 the demtrll’-d.“< of the miners and the ‘ lconcos'siolls"df’tlle mine-owners, but also the ,{—,’l‘aV€"’iillpOl‘t{lllCe to the consunl(}l's_ T-h-:3’-"1‘0.~‘llit is that while the Governm_Cllt considers an increase in price‘. to the consumer of from 23s to 3s might be justified by the conclusion 311-ived_L:a:t(illr.the Govern;ment’s answer 10 Mr; §l§,inp.toll’s first question. and . I*hougll,it cannot decide, there may 1101; Li(;:c];3'nie.;i_ts outside official data which -

might be found to justify some slight addition to that‘increasc of from 25 to 3s per ton, yet firstly the GOVC’-rn~ mcnt does not consider it probable that such elements, leaving official data open to fair question, do exist, and secondly that even if it could be shown that a margin does exist which ‘is not fully covered by the owners’ recent offer, such a margin could not be large enough to -be of pra-ctiral importance The emphatic opinion of the Government is that, firstly, the accuracy of the oflicial data can be relied on, and secondly, that, accepting those 'data, it appears clear the‘ increase Of,fcred by the owners would raise the miners ea’rnings to an amount at least ,equivalent in purchasing power at predwar earnings MORE TRAINS PROMISED. WELLINGTON, Aug. 21. r The COlll position having slightly improved, it is understood that next week through trains will run between Auckland, New Plymouth, and we}lington, and between Christrhurch, Dunedin. and Invercai-gill. "A train will leave Invercargill on Monday for Dunedin, and (leave Dunedin for Christchurch on Tuesday, leave Christ- a church for Dunedin on Thursday, and Dunedin for Invercargill on Friday. On the northern lines a train will eave ‘ Auckland for Wellingtoii on Tuesday.l and Wellington for Auckland on‘ Thursday, and a train will leave W'el- - for New Plymouth on Tuesday} and New Plymouth for Wellingtn en! Thursday. Connection with l\'apier will be made at Palmerston. The restrictions on passengers will remain‘ in operation, as the necessity for coal- ‘ saving still exists. I