The South London Gas Dispute The dispute over the South
Metropolitan Gas Company's new tariff raises an important question of principle. If a certain class of consumer can only be supplied at a loss is it equitable that the loss should fall on the remaining consumers ? If the answer to that is in the negative, and any increase of the tariff is regarded as intolerable, then in the case of an important public service the only course appears to be for the service to be .taken over by a public authority, which can, if it chooses, supply a necessity at unremunerative prices at the expense of the whole body of rate- or taxpayers. The President of the South Metropolitan Gas Company claims that as head of a corn- rriercial concern he is bound to supply gas at a remunera- tive price, that so far as that is not the case at present the price must be raised, and that the increase lately announced (due to a steady rise in cost of production) is on lines specifically authorised by a rigid Act of Parlia- ment. The general protests against the new tariff seem based on the doctrine that whatever happens the price of gas to small consumers must not be raised. There is a great deal to be said for that, but it does not follow necessarily that the small consumer must be carried on the shoulders either of the large consumer or the share- holder. More light on the whole position is needed, and it would be well if the gas company could hold its hand pending an impartial fact-finding enquiry as proposed by Mr. Herbert Morrison, and approved by Mr. Runciman.
*
Previous page
