British Achievement SELF-DEPRECATION FOR ONCE ESCHEWED

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28560, 14 April 1958, Page 8

British Achievement SELF-DEPRECATION FOR ONCE ESCHEWED

(By

“LYNCEUS”

of the “Economist”)

(From the “Economist” Intelligence Unit]

London, April I.—Understatement is tradition 11 among the British. It is an amusing and endearing trait; but it can also do much harm, and, especially when it is addressed to people who are accustomed to put a different emphasis on their claims, it can mislead sadly. Understatement can occur not only in the use of words: when “not too bad” means “very good” and when, conversely “not too good” means “very bad indeed.” It can also be part of a general presentation of the case for Britain. The picture of Britain which is usually projected in the posters intended to attract visitors to this country is that of a country of ancient country houses, thatched cottages, “beefeaters” in Tudor uniforms, venerable cathedrals—in fact, that of a country in which the past is a great deal more important than the present and the future. Britain certainly has this tradition to offer; but to think of her purely in these terms of the first Elizabeth is to do much less than justice to the most important of the facets’ of the age of Elizabeth the Second. “Modest . . . Boasting”

It is not often that the mistake is made in Britain of erring in the o.ther direction and of indulging a modest measure of boasting. That must be the excuse for an unusual catalogue of achievements that has recently been published under the aegis of the Treasury. It says very little that is new: but by the sheer compression of its claims it builds up a picture of achievement, confidence, and promise for the future which stands in impressive contrast with the customary denigration which the British usually mete out to themselves and which the rest of the world is all too often inclined to take at face value.

The main emphasis in this catalogue must be placed on the radical transformation of the British industrial scene which has taken place since the war. This nas been prompted by inventions and technological advance in which British scientists and industrialists have taken a leading part. Industries which have been built on new techniques—including electronic engineering, aircraft, and chemicals—are now contributing a significantly large share to the national output and are providing increased employment for a labour force of steadily growing skill. As a corollary of this trend the. British economy has become far less dependent on some of the older industries such as textiles.

The most important advance is that made by mechanical engineering, whose output has increased by about 50 per cent, compared with before the war, an increase made all the more impressive by the fact that even then it was a large industry. A similar increase has been made by the vehicles industry, notably aircraft and motor-cars. More dramatic than either of these, however, has been the five-fold increase in the size of the British electronics industry, which is now the second largest in the world. There nas also been a tremendous advance in the output of the chemical industry. particularly in plastics and petro-chemicals, neither of which contributed appreciably to prewar output but which today rank with the giants of the world. In the petro-chemical industry. Britain is second only to the United States. One interesting comparative claim is that the output of plastic materials in Britain today is nearly as large as that of sheet steel and tinplate together. Change in Lancashire

A good illustration of what the industrial adjustment has meant is provided by Lancashire, where the economic landscape has been transformed over the last decade. The textile industry has lost ground and tens of thousands of operatives have left it. They have found no difficulty in getting employment, mainly in the engineering and chemical industries. In this transition the workers themselves have benefited greatly and have raised the average level of their remuneration. Lancashire itself has benefited by being far less dependent on one industry. Needless to say, the national interest has also gained because the new industries have contributed to Britain’s exports a much larger, and, in terms of labour costs, a more valuable contribution, than textiles could ever have done. Here is a perfect illustration of industrial mutation and adaptability which, since it has been achieved in a context of full employment and expansion, has scarcely caused a tremor of frictional unemployment. Even more reassuring is the fact that the new industries have played their full part in the growth of British export trade. At the end of the Second World War the balance-of-payments prospect for Britain seemed grim indeed, gome of our best overseas investments had been sacrificed to pay cash for food and munitions* in the first two years of the war, before lend-lease came to the rescue. In the full deployment of our industrial effort towards the winning of the war we had also thrown our normal export trade to the winds, and at the end of the war British exports had fallen in volume to about a third of what they were in 1938.

In 1945 and 1946, when plans were being made for reconverting the economy to a peace-time basis, it was calculated that in due course British exports would have to rise in volume to 75 per cent, above the pre-war level in order to allow Britain, to make ends meet. That growth could not be secured immediately; hence the assistance which was sought from the United States and Canada to obtain credits that would enable the demobilisation of the wartime economy to take place under tolerable conditions. These credits, alas, were used up all too quickly; but they helped Britain to achieve the necessary transition. Exports Doubled Thereupon the incredible happened. The target of a 75 per cent, increase in the volume of British exports was passed some time ago. We are now exporting in real terms about twice wnat we exported before the war. Over a quarter of the nation’s output is being shipped abroad and in some industries the proportion is appreciably "higher than this. In

motor-cars, for example, it is more than 50 per cent. Britain’s share in tne world trade in electrical machinery, which was onetenth before the war, is now a quarter. Our share in world trade in motor-cars has risen from one-sixth to more than a quarter and in tractors from onetwentieth to over a quarter. These are not the achievements of an effete or thatched-roof economy. They indicate a measure of competitive qualities, technological achievement, and hard work which common discussion of these aspects of British life seldom acknowledges. It is well to recall in this context that hours worked in manufacturing industry are about six more a week in British industry than m Canada, seven more than in the United States, and slightly more than in Western Germany. Hand-in-hand with these achievements Britain has done its share in bearing the burden of international responsibilities. Sterling. despite exchange control and all that goes with it. still finances about half the world’s trade. Britain still lends overseas a larger amount per head *of population than any other country in the world. In the defence of the free world we are still spending a larger proportion of the national income than any of our allies except the United States. These claims are made, not in a spirit of boastfulness and selfsatisfaction,. but as a necessary rejoinder to a view, all too often proclaimed in the world at large, that John Bull is past his prime and only fit now for slippered ease by his antiquated open fireside. It is well that the falsity of this picture should occasionally —very occasionally— be revealed.