Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Feb 1936

Vol. 60 No. 1

Private Deputies' Business. - Adjournment Debate—Price of Coal.

General Mulcahy

I asked the Minister to-day whether he is aware that the price charged for coal by importers to bellmen to-day is 12/- per ton more than it was in January, 1935. I asked him whether he had done anything to satisfy himself when the 5/- tax was taken off coal that 5/- reduction in the price of coal sold by importers to bellmen was sufficient and he said yes. He denied that he was aware of the fact that the price now being charged to bellmen, with the tax taken off, is 12/- more than the price in January last year. The answer of the Minister shows that he is oblivious of a very serious state of affairs and it is for the purpose of further ventilating the matter and hearing more of what is in his mind with regard to it that I raise the matter to-night. It is of vital importance not only to the poorer classes in the city and country but to classes other than these. I also venture to say that it is a matter that affects not only coal but other commodities that are affected by quota orders, licences, and such like things. I do not want to touch in any way upon the coal-cattle pact but on matters that are ascertainable, controllable and remediable inside our own shores. The Minister's Press has called the recent move to ventilate the grievances that people lie under in regard to coal prices a political ramp. The Minister has called it names of the same kind. If it is a ramp to expose these things, then it is our duty to ramp.

There is one matter to which I should like to call attention. The Minister says that political capital is being made out of this. Political issues are being woven about this in connection with the farmers' interests and the coal-cattle pact. As the statement has been made that those who want a further reduction in coal are prejudicing the farmers' interests and as a statement has been made by Deputy Briscoe, of the Government Party, which implies that we may see within a short time the farmers' interests in the export of £1,200,000 of additional cattle prejudiced in whole or in part to certain German interests, I want to say that if any part of those interests, or the whole of those interests, is sacrificed by the Government to any German interests, then they will show that they simply have their tongue in their check in regard to the interests of the farmer in this £1,200,000 of exports, just as much as they had their tongue in their cheek when they destroyed £14,000,000 worth of the farmers' exports already, because more than 50 per cent. of the unnecessary and exorbitantly high price for coal to-day arises out of factors that exist within our own shores which have nothing to do with British miners or coal owners or with freights or anything else.

Mr. Lemass

What are those factors?

General Mulcahy

I am going to put before the Minister what the position is. I am going to ask him to get after what these factors are. If I can help him to get after these factors, I shall help him. Deputy Cooney asked what my interest in bellmen was that I should base the discussion on the price charged to bellmen. Bellmen are a very necessary and very important piece of the machinery of coal distribution in the city. They are the people who serve the poorer classes in the city and those who live in apartments of such a kind that they cannot get in coal by the ton or more. They have recently been in a pitiable condition, pressed up against the poorer sections of the people as they have been, and made the machinery for extorting out of them the high price paid for coal.

However, what I am concerned with at present is stating the net facts. The outstanding facts that we must bear in mind, and that the Minister ought to know off by heart, are these: that the average price per ton of coal brought into this country in January, 1935, was 21/2. I asked the Minister what was taken into consideration in assessing that value and the Minister did not reply. His own returns tell us that that figure includes the cost to the importer with insurance and freight to the place of landing here. So that coal delivered at Dublin, the average price per ton of which in January, 1935, was 21/2, according to the Minister's figures, was, according to the figures quoted by him again to-day, 25/- per ton in December last, the last month for which we have official figures, indicating that coal landed at the quays in Dublin had increased by 3/10 per ton between January and December, 1935.

What is the price charged by importers to bellmen to-day as compared with January, 1935? In January, 1935, bellmen and coal factors were able to obtain coal at 25/- per ton. They paid 42/- per ton in January this year, and then, when the 5/- was taken off, 37/- per ton. They are paying 37/- per ton now, an increase of 12/- per ton on a commodity landed at the port of Dublin at an increase of only 3/10 per ton. There is therefore 8/2 to be accounted for there—8/2 of an increase unaccounted for in any way and in no way affected by British miners or coal owners or by freight or insurance in crossing the Channel.

The Minister tells us he is unaware of these facts. In addition he tells us that the 5/- reduction in price was sufficient when the 5/- tax was taken off coal. The Minister told us in November last that the Controller of Prices had the question of coal prices under constant review. The 5/- tax was put on in the spring and has now been taken off and the Minister says that a reduction in price of 5/- was sufficient. But we have to see what was the position in the spring of last year. The position was this: 21/2 was the price of coal imported in January; 22/6 in February; 21/11 in March. There was an increase per ton in the cost of coal landed in Dublin in March, 1935, of 9d. per ton over January, 1935. What was the increase in the price charged by importers to bellmen between January and March, 1935? In January they could get their coal for 25/- per ton, but on the 6th March it was 30/- per ton showing an increase of 5/-. On the 11th March, it was 34/- showing an increase of 9/-; on the 15th March the price was 36/-, showing an increase of 11/- per ton. According to the Minister's own quoted price, there was only an increase of 9d. per ton on importers in March, 1935, but between January and March there was an unexplained increase in the price to bellmen of 5/3 per ton.

We have to look at the winter position. The Minister stated, in reply to Deputy Myles to-day, that a considerable increase has taken place in the price of coal delivered here. What was that increase? He told us that the average import price of household coal had risen from 22/7 in October, 1935, to 25/- in the month of December, showing an increase of 2/2 per ton. What was the movement in prices between importers and bellmen? Bellmen paid 36/- per ton in October; they were charged 40/- by the 11th December, but on the 6th January the price was 42/- and when the 5/- was taken off it was reduced to 37/-. I want to stop at the 6th January and see what took place inside the period between October and December. There was an increase from 36/- to 42/- in this period when the 5/- was on. So here we have a period when the 5/- was running over the whole time and where the increase in the figure of 2/6 translated itself into an increase of 6/- when the coal came to be exchanged between the importers and the bellmen.

The Minister mentioned yesterday— I want to refer to this parenthetically —when he addressed himself to the question of coal prices, that bell coal was sold in February, 1935, at 35/- per ton and in February, 1936, at 37/- per ton. Now I leave him to be dealt with by the people who are buying coal for subsequent retailing to the poorer classes in the city. I leave it to them to tell him how far away he is from the truth in stating that the price they paid in February, 1935, was 35/-. The Minister's figures are utterly fantastical so far as the price quoted by him this morning goes. What I want to try to get him to face up to is what I stated in the beginning; that the increase between January and December was 3/10 while the increase now with the 5/- taken off is 12/- per ton. The Minister in his answer to-day suggested that he was satisfied that the importers had done all they could do in reducing the price of coal by 5/- when the 5/- tax was taken off. We are not going to be satisfied with that, as far as we can understand the situation and criticise it. The people are bearing this cost to a much greater extent than the increased cost to importers would warrant and they are not able to bear it. The Minister has a grave responsibility in this matter. He cannot throw that responsibility over on the Controller of Prices who neglected to face the situation in the spring of last year. It is his job to do that and to see that not only the 5/- tax is taken off. The Controller I admit was prejudiced considering that the Minister of the Department of Industry and Commerce had consulted with the importers and was satisfied that 5/- was enough to come off when the 5/- tax was taken off. The sum of 8/2 is being charged by importers to bellmen to-day more than they ought to be charged. It is the Minister's responsibility to investigate that position apart altogether from the hardship which is being caused to the poor. The fact, however, that hardships are being caused to the poor as a result of these increased charges is the responsibility of the Minister and we want to know what he is going to do about it.

Mr. Morrissey

The Minister, in a speech which he made last night, referred to the question of coal prices and said:—

"The Opposition had been endeavouring to work up a campaign in respect of coal prices,"

and he went on to say:

"That campaign was utterly dishonest and based on gross misrepresentation of the facts."

He then proceeded to misrepresent the facts himself. The Minister gave figures in regard to the prices charged for coal, but he was very careful of the period he selected for those figures. He selected February of last year, as against February of last year. Why should the Minister not have taken January of last year as against January of this year? The suggestion of the Minister would seem to convey to the public that household coal is forthcoming at practically as low prices to-day as it was 13 months ago. The Minister took care, as I said, to choose a period when the coal-cattle pact came into operation—February, 1935. But the Minister cannot blink this fact: that household coal, and good household coal—as good as if not better than the household coal of to-day—was forthcoming in January, 1935, at 12/- per ton less than to-day.

There is no use in the Minister telling us that British coal was so much in February, 1935, and so much to-day. I want him to face up to this fact that household coal of as good a quality, and, taken over a period, of a better quality, and a more consistent quality, than today, was available in February, 1935, at 12/- a ton less than to-day. In January, 1935, best Continental household coal was 35/- a ton, delivered in Dublin; in January, 1936, best British house coal was 48/- per ton. The Minister stated to-day in reply to an interjection by Deputy Belton, regarding admitting Continental coal, that that would make no difference in the price. Was the Minister serious about that? Was he honest about it? Can he advance any proof to this House, that, if we were allowed to import Polish or German coal in competition with British coal, we would get it not only at a lower price but get better coal? Is not the Minister aware of the fact that retailers outside the city were paying, up to the removal of the coal tax, 17/- more per ton for supplies of house coal than they were paying 12 months ago? These are facts that cannot be disputed. Documentary evidence can be produced. We had the Minister getting up and talking about a dishonest campaign, and of gross misrepresentation, but, in order to misrepresent the position, he deliberately took a period which would suggest to anyone reading the figure, and who was not conversant with the facts, that there was no increase in the price here and that coal was available at as low a price to-day as it was 13 months ago. If anybody is guilty of misrepresentation and of gross neglect in this matter, it is the Minister. I should like if the Minister would address himself to the point Deputy Mulcahy put to him, and in particular to the specific point I put to him, that the only household coal available to-day is costing the people 12/- per ton more than it cost them in 1935, before the coal-cattle pact was signed.

Mr. Belton

When the Minister is replying I should like to know if he will deny that we have been getting coal inferior in quality to what we were getting at a lower price as indicated by the previous speakers, before the coal-cattle pact. I suggest to the Minister that there is no use in comparing prices now and prices a year ago. Will the Minister apply himself to the comparative prices here and in the North of Ireland at the present time?

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

Certainly. I think that is the answer to Deputy Morrissey's point.

Mr. Morrissey

No.

Mr. Lemass

I am going to deal with Deputy Morrissey's contention that if Continental coal could be imported here the price of coal would be lower than it is. Continental coal can be imported into Belfast. There is nothing to prevent that; there is no duty and no restriction on importation. I am going to give for the information of Deputy Morrissey comparative prices in Belfast and in Dublin at the moment.

Mr. Morrissey

That is not meeting the point.

General Mulcahy

What has that to do with the net point I put?

Mr. Lemass

I will deal with Deputy Mulcahy when I finish with Deputy Morrissey.

Mr. Belton

Will you deal with Continental coal?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister must be given an opportunity of replying.

Mr. Lemass

Coal sold in Belfast, which compares with Orrel coal sold here——

Mr. Belton

Is it Orrel coal?

Mr. Lemass

——the list price is 50/- and the net price 48/- here. That is listed for sale in Belfast at 53/- per ton. Second English, as it is described in Belfast, compares to second Wigan sold here, and is 46/- per ton in Belfast as compared with 45/- per ton here. Second English, which is sold in Belfast at 39/- a ton, compares with bell coal sold here at a net price of 37/- a ton. That disposes of the contention that the increase in the price of coal is due in any way to the fact that Continental coal is not coming in. Continental coal was never imported to this country until the duty was imposed on British coal.

General Mulcahy

What about the 12/-?

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Mulcahy has drawn attention to the fact that the price of coal has gone up. It has gone up, and not only in this country but generally. That is the particular fact he is trying to conceal from the people in his propaganda in relation to coal prices. He has reversed his tactics this evening. In his opening communication to the Press he made it quite clear that he was not attributing the rise in coal prices to profiteering on the part of the coal merchants. He said the cause which gave rise to it was the coal-cattle pact. He ran away from that.

General Mulcahy

Certainly not.

Mr. Lemass

Now he says that the coal-cattle pact had nothing to do with it. The whole of his speech was directed to the point that the increase was due to profiteering on the part of the coal merchants. He said that the rise in prices was due to factors under our control.

General Mulcahy

Fifty per cent.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order!

Mr. Lemass

The only possible interpretation of his remarks is that the coal merchants are profiteering in the price of coal and that it is within our power to prevent them doing so. That is a complete reversal of the position he took up in the Press for the past three weeks. The main purpose of this campaign, this utterly dishonest campaign, is to embarrass the Government and to do the ulmost possible national damage at the present time. The coal-cattle past has been in operation since the beginning of February last year, and there was not a word from the Opposition about the effect of that pact or about coal prices until this time. It is for Deputies to use their own imagination in connection with the question as to why this time was selected which, I suggest, is for a reason Deputy Mulcahy knows that at this time he could do the ulmost damage in the national interest. It is the sole aim of that Party to do all the damage they can in the hope thereby that the people can be induced to turn against the Government.

Mr. Morrissey

The old dodge.

Mr. Lemass

It has been stated by these Deputies that the price of coal went up in consequence of the coal-cattle pact. They are very concerned about the price of coal. Their concern is new born. I gave last night certain figures concerning the price at which coal was imported to this country, not merely last year but when they were in office, and were in a position to take measures that they now suggest we should take in relation to coal prices. The average price of British coal imported into this country during the period in which the coal-cattle arrangement was in operation f.o.b. at the English port of exportation is shown by the British trade statistics as 17/8 a ton. That price is 2/- a ton less than the lowest price at which British coal was imported here during any of the 11 years they were in office. British coal had an exclusive market here until 1931, and British coal exporters sold coal in this country at the home market price. The difference between that home market price and the export price of British coal sent to other countries was always fairly considerable. In 1931 it was 3/6 per ton; in 1935, during the coal-cattle agreement, it was 1/5 per ton. I do not think we should be satisfied with the existence of any difference, but I want to give this proof of the insincerity of the campaign with which Deputy Mulcahy is associated, that they never at any time, when they were in charge of affairs here, expressed the slightest dissatisfaction with that position, and never made any effort to rectify it, even when pressed to do so in this House in 1929 and 1930. The price of coal has gone up. It has gone up owing to known causes. Because of the situation which developed in England when the threat of a stoppage arose, all the big coal users in England and in every part of the world where English coal is used thought to anticipate that stoppage by laying in large supplies of coal and, consequently, the price was brought up, and for a period an artificial scarcity operated. That did not affect those coal importers who had contracts, but it did affect the coal importers who were buying in the open market and who had not contract arrangements. The effect was to secure a general rise in the price of coal all over the world wherever British coal is being used. There is nothing that we can do to rectify that situation apart from what we have done. The removal of the Customs duty from coal was effected by the Government because of that position, and the effect of that removal was to bring down the price of coal to what it was 12 months previously, broadly speaking.

Mr. Morrissey

13 months previously.

Mr. Lemass

The situation would not be remedied by giving the right of admission to continental coal. As I have said, continental coal was never imported here until there was a duty on British coal. It can come into Belfast and yet the prices of coal in Belfast are, on the whole, higher than they are here.

Mr. Morrissey

At what price can it be imported into Dublin now?

Mr. T. Kelly

You are asking too many questions.

Mr. Dillon

Hear, hear!

Mr. Lemass

The situation is one which calls for the close attention of the Government, and it is getting the close attention of the Government. The Government is concerned with the effect of rising coal prices upon the consumers of coal and not merely with making propaganda for a political Party. It was because of that concern that it took the action of removing the Customs duty.

Mr. Morrissey

And kept it one from last February. That was done for the same reason.

Mr. Lemass

I do not know what the future of coal prices is going to be. It is reasonable to anticipate that, now that the threat of a stoppage in Great Britain has been removed, temporarily, at any rate, coal prices will tend to move downwards, but there are other factors in the international situation working in the contrary direction. In any event our concern is to ensure that we get coal at a fair price and also to provide that the profits secured by the distributors of coal in this country are reasonable. There was one time what appeared to be a ring amongst coal importers which had a definite influence upon prices, but any indications I have received with regard to that situation recently are to the effect that the ring is definitely broken and that there is keen competition between the various groups of importers at the present time. But if there should be any reason to think the contrary, to believe that undue profits are being taken, there is power to take the necessary action. No indication of that has, however, been made available.

I want again to ask that this attempt to make political propaganda out of a situation which is not under the control of the Government of this country, or, in fact, of the Government of any country, but which is due to causes which are well known, should cease. It is not helping anybody and it is certainly not helping the poor people for whom the Deputies opposite are now, for the first time, shedding their crocodile tears.

Mr. Morrissey

It brought off the 5/- anyway.

Mr. Lemass

The average price at which British coal was imported into this country since 1929 has tended downwards, and, in fact, the average price in the March-December period, 1935, was slightly lower than in any of the three previous years, and very substantially lower than in the years before the change of Government. The same situation is shown by the figures relating to household coal only, as apart from all varieties of coal. Deputy Mulcahy misrepresented the reply I gave him to-day. He asked a question concerning the increase in the price of coal to bellmen and said that I answered that I was not aware of the facts. What I said was, in the usual parliamentary phrase, that I was not aware that his facts were correct and neither am I so aware. On the contrary, they are incorrect.

General Mulcahy

Is the Minister going to give us the facts?

Mr. Lemass

I have given the facts.

General Mulcahy

You have?

Mr. Lemass

Yes. The Deputy, however, adopted the usual Cumann na nGaedheal device of indicating that there was action which could be taken that would rectify this position, but he did not say what the action was. There are still five minutes during which this debate can be continued, and I am quite prepared to give these five minutes to the Deputy, so that he can tell us what he thinks should be done that will have the effect of reducing the price of coal to the extent he thinks it can be reduced—by 8/6 a ton.

General Mulcahy

I shall be very glad to make suggestions. In the first place, there are two points on which I should like to get clear. The Minister introduced the question of Belfast. Would the Minister look at this evening's paper which declares that the Belfast Corporation, at its meeting, carried an amendment by 21 votes to 12 that the matter of giving them powers to retail coal in the city, in order to fight the high prices of coal in the city, would be included in a Parliamentary Bill to be promoted by the corporation. Here the Minister apparently subscribes to our coal importers fixing their prices on a level with the corporation.

The Minister denies my facts and says that he has given the facts. I am going to make the suggestion the Minister speaks of and again I restate the outlying fact that, between January 1935 and December 1935, coal delivered with insurance and freight at say, the Port of Dublin, or at any rate at our ports all round the country, increased only by 3/10. The price charged by importers to bellmen in the same time has increased by 12/-. The Minister has his Department, the Controller of Prices and the Prices Commission. Does he ask us to believe that he has no powers to get either the Controller of Prices or the Prices Commission to investigate these circumstances and to find out whether it is a fact that a commodity which increased in price in that particular period only by 3/10 a ton is being sold at 12/- a ton increase and where the increase is being pocketed and by whom, and to take the necessary steps to stop that.

Mr. Lemass

I take it, therefore, that the Deputy is suggesting that the coal importers are profiteering to the extent of 8/6 a ton?

General Mulcahy

I am, certainly.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy has possibly some justification for that contention?

General Mulcahy

I feel very much that I have. I also feel very much that this is not departing from the original line on which I started.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy said quite the reverse last week.

General Mulcahy

I said definitely that the reason that coal prices are high here is because of the coal-cattle pact, and the quotas and licences that came as a tail from that, and that just as this particular commodity, coal, is being influenced in this way inside our shores, the Minister will find that where quotas and licences are operating, as they are in respect of other commodities, the same position is down on the people and that profits are being pocketed. The Minister can get after this matter if he wants to do it. The Minister is never behindhand, and never lacking in vim and energy in getting after a point he wants, and if he wants to find why and where that extra money is being taken out of the factors' pockets, and more, therefore, out of the poor, he can get after it if he wants to. If he wants any help from me, I shall be very glad to give it to him, and I know a few more who will be very glad to help him, too.

The Dáil adjourned at 11 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 6th February.