BRITISH INDUSTRIES

Evening Star, Issue 20019, 9 November 1928, Page 6

BRITISH INDUSTRIES

LASOUfI ATTACK ON GWERttttENT m CHURCHILL'S VIGOROUS REPLY (British Official Wirelsss.) Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. RUGBY, November 8. (Received November 9, at 1 p.m.) When the debate on the Addiess-iu-Heply to the King’s Speech was resumed in the Rouse of Commons Mr J. R. dynes (on behalf of the Labour Party) moved an amendment regretting that, although the Government had had four years of office, the country was burdened with unemployment in a most acute form. He said that appalling conditions pi evaded in many mining areas, and the proposals outlined in the King’s Speech were utterly inadequate to meet the existing industrial situation.

Mr Churchill replied with an exhaustive analysis of the industrial situation. Deaiing with the suggestion made by Mr Clynes that this country should resume relations with Russia as a means of reducing unemployment, he declared that anyone who .supposed that the readmission of the Soviet Embassy would make the slightest contribution to the problem of unemployment was misleading himself, and would mislead others. It was very easy to say that the present industrial situation was the fault of the Government, but it was far easier to say and easier to prove that a large part of it was the fault of the Labour Party. Had Mr Clynes forgotten the general strike and the prolonged coal stoppage of 1920? Through these we had been thrown bade two or three years, and other nations were forging ahead. The reserves of industry were exhausted during that period, and the resources of the State to aid the unfortunate had been grievously impaired. Had the Labour Party not admitted its responsibility? Had there not been an effort on the part of the responsible leaders of Labour to establish a different and saner policy? Were not the Communists being excluded from the Labour Party’s politics? Was not Russian interference being repulsed in domestic affairs? Was not Mr Cook, who led the miners, in 1926, being discredited? These signs of amendment were welcome, hut they were too late. The price of 1926 had to he paid. The problem of unemployment was wide and mysterious. There was heavy unemployment in the United States, and in Russia, under the most ruthless expression of Socialism, there was also very heavy unemployment. Neither of these countries was making anything like the provision to succour the unemployed that was being made here. Ho said he believed that in the years before the war there were daily less than ~00.000 oi 400.000 unemployed. There were now 1.374.000 unemployed. By the Great War a large part of the wealth of Britain and the world had been consumed. The world all round had grown much bigger, and countries which were quite ready before the war to buy our various manufactures wished to make things themselves. Vigorous competitors met us in every foreign market, and our customers increasingly closed their doors upon our wares. Wc were wounded beyond ail other producing countries with debt and taxation. Mr Churchill pointed out that besides great masses of persons under the unemployment insurance scheme there were at present 224,000 women upon the unemployed lists who were scarcely ever included in any other total. Then there were the coal miners. Until throe years ago 1,300,000 persons wore engaged in the coal industry. Now there were only 920,000. LONDON, November 8. (Received November 9, at 1.30 p.m.)

In the debate in the Commons Mr W. Runciman (Liberal) stated that all the Ministerial assurances that bad times in trade were passing had been falsified. Safeguarding would not bring relief to the basic trades. The gravest and greatest problem was the position of the coal, cotton, and wool trades. Unless we found better ways of using coal there was no hope for many of the coalfields. The cotton trade crisis was by no means past. Poverty was becoming chronic in ■ parts of Lancashire. Woollen goods were suffering from the loss of foreign markets. A recovery of world trade could onlv come from an extension of personal energy and the use of brains, confidence, courage, and skill.

Sir Robert Horne (Conservative) said that many of those who were unemployed would in tho pre-war days have emigrated. He honed that Empire settlement would bo accelerated. He did not believe that oil would permanently displace coal, but lie considered that belter way* of using the latter would be devised, probably in the near future. Pulverised coal would be blown into ships as easily as oil through pipe lines. Iron and steel should bo given a chance of proving the case for safeguarding. The steel trade was essential to the very existence of the nation.

Sir Oswald Mosley (Labour) said if the aged could be removed from industry and youth delayed from entering it by the raising of tho school leaving ago it would go a long way to a solution of unemployment.—Australian Press Association-United Service.