THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1950. THE STEEL BILL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27500, 21 September 1950, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1950. THE STEEL BILL

By the skin of its teeth Mr Attlee’s Government has again survived a vote of censure on its reckless policy of Socialism. Mr Attlee himself must have been fully aware that he was exposing his party to ignominious defeat in accepting the Opposition’s challenge to his declaration of proceeding with the Steel Nationalisation Act, but he apparently could no longer resist the pressure from the militant wing of his own supporters and was forced to stake everything on a division in the House. The result, a majority of six in a total vote of 606, can in no way be interpreted as a mandate for a Government holding office on a minority of the popular vote to proceed with a policy that will create a grave upset in Great Britain’s largest and most important industry. The mere fact that the issue has been revived, in spite of the openly expressed fears by some members of the party that it would offend' public opinion, is, —as a writer in an English publication recently remarked —a “ clear example of the way in which a minority within a minority can achieve its aims.” The Act has been revived “because a- handful of Ministers who know their minds have established a moral ascendancy over the majority of their colleagues who lack the moral courage to tell their supporters a few unpleasant truths about party doctrines.”

The iron and steel industry is of such great economic and strategic importance that its future is something more than a domestic issue. It is, perhaps, the most efficiently organised industry in the United Kingdom. It has consistently met the targets of increased production set by the Government and its prices have been kept lower than those of its competitors in the United States or the Continent. There might be a case for reorganisation of the industry—Mr Churchill indicated that there was—but official interference with the industry ofl which Great Britain and the Commonwealth countries are largely dependent for their defence requirements appears at this range to be absolute folly. It might even jeopardise the future of the Marshall Plan, for a great many political leaders in the United States could be easily convinced that a Government that can afford to experiment with the confusions of Socialism is in no great need of aid. The post-war record of the British steel industry has been so good that the Government can have no complaints regarding either production or costs. The scheme for nationalisation is being pursued for nationalisation’s sake and, as with the coal and transport industries, there has been no evidence that any thought has been given. to what should be done with the industry once it is nationalised. To the people of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, whose prosperity is largely dependent on a thriving heavy industry in the United Kingdom, this insistence on dogma before planning is the most alarming aspect of the Government’s plans.

THE WAR MEMORIAL By a minority vote at a public meeting last evening the proposal to erect a sports centre as the civic war memorial was approved, 80 people out of an attendance of 170 voting in favour of it. This decision is not final. It has yet to be approved by the City Council. If the recommendation of the meeting is accepted, the proposal has next to be submitted to the Department of Internal Affairs, which will advise whether it is eligible to receive a Government subsidy. If this subsidy is not granted, the people of Dunedin will have to raise the whole amount of £20,000 for this memorial —or seek some alternative to it. The meeting last night represented only the concluding stage of the investigations made by a committee appointed to consider the numerous suggestions which were originally put forward. The work of this committee has been carefully carried out, and to its members are due the thanks of the citizens. It must be said, however, that their labours were poorly rewarded by the small attendance at this crucial meeting. Indeed, a decision on such a matter by so small a proportion of the city’s population can hdrdly be regarded as carrying any weight whatsoever. It would be safe to assume that the principal advocates of the three proposals and a few of their supporters comprised trie attendance and that those who were apathetic or opposed to any or to all of the proposals stayed away. After all, few people will go to. much trouble to register a negative vote. But something has been achieved. Some practical suggestions have been brought forward and arguments in favour of the proposed amenities—all of a utilitarian nature —can be advanced in all sincerity. It can be suggested, too, that there has also been an indication of public feeling—even if it is to be concluded that the feeling is one of apathy. It is now the responsibility of the City Council, as the representative of trie citizens, to decide whether the proposal recommended by last night’s meeting will be acceptable to the majority of the people and will be fully in keeping with the dignity of the city as the memorial to its dead. There will be little surprise if the council considers it inappropriate.