Greymouth Evening Star. SATURDAY, MARCH 22, 1947. Socialism In Britain

Greymouth Evening Star, 22 March 1947, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. SATURDAY, MARCH 22, 1947. Socialism In Britain

ywo at least of Britain’s Socialists are far from satisfied with the trend of trade union practices in their country which they claim are restricting output at a time when an increase was never so much required. One of them, Mr. Jack Jones M.P., who for many years was a steel smelter in Lancashire, declared in an outspoken speech in the House of Commons that the Socialist Government should “get down to brass tacks.” He claimed he said, to be “one of the few members of the House who has never earned a penny piece except on the incentive system of payment by results.” He added that that was the way to get results.

. The trade union opposition to incentive pay' is, however, only one of the difficult aspects of the present labour situation in Britain. After victory the United Kingdom required at least years of national union as much as it ever needed it in 'the war. Instead of setting itself to restore solidity and abundance by the efforts of all, the Government began to drive through a revolutionary party programme of huge magnitude and at a speed never previously known under Parliamentary institutions. Deep dissatisfaction spread through the country, and not the least affected, strangely enough, were the Government’s own supporters. Conditions were also made disturbing for employers and managers; largely they were-almost paralysed by uncertainty. The first revolutionary phase kept the Avorkers restless and excited. It is estimated that since the 40-hour week movement (since dealt a heavy blow by the Government itself) began to exert its influence strongly, though not fully, 1,500,000 persons, though in employment, are doing less work. They are more in love with the dream than the business on which the standard of life depends. It is not to be wondered that in these circumstances the output drive has suffered.

Another factor in the situation is that Socialism by the method of its bureaucratic creed has drawn many thousands from the ranks of labour. Bureaucracy requires officials, the business of many of whom is concerned with the task of prying into other people’s business. Stern Realities.

The economic ideologists of Britain, it is fair to say, have partly been the victims of circumstances, but largely, as was pointed out by an authoritative British writer recently, they have been the dupes of their own expectations. They now find themselves peering into a gulf of anxieties. They have to face the stern realities of an economic crisis, aggravated by the hardest -winter in living memory. They have, too, to face the difficult task of re-educating the people, a people that -was led to believe by ardent propagandists that the advent of the Socialist Government meant a short-cut to paradise on earth. The national, campaign to step up the drive for production is an unpleasant necessity for the Government. It is no less unpleasant for those to W’hom it is directed, for they have been misled by limitless dreams.

The Government is entitled to some credit that, even at this late hour, it lias braced itself sufficiently to tell the truth that Britain is heading for economic disaster if the present drift is not arrested. It made an appeal for increased production on a previous occasion but declined to mitigate in the least its own partisan programme. Tn that matter it was probably the prisoner of its own followers. The indications are now, however, that a halt will be called in the march to a Socialist State. Economic necessity has dictated it.

The remedy was stated by two rebel Socialists in the British Parliament —more output per man-hour. By that means, and that means only, will the standard of life be maintained. The introduction of foreign labour, as has now been decided on following the relaxation of trade union opposition, will undoubtedly help. The matter is in the final analysis, however, both a group and individual responsibility.

Socialism and the Socialists have been dealt a heavy blow in Britain. The country faces the danger of economic ruin. It is clear that those who seek Io improve the status and the lot of the worker will not do it through the full implementation of Socialist policy. Their aim is indeed a worthy one, but the remarkable irony of the situation is that the methods they have followed threaten to reduce the standard of life to a level which has not been touched for many decades.