PRESS REACTIONS IN BRITAIN TO WHITE PAPER ON NATION’S ECONOMY

Wanganui Chronicle, 24 February 1947, Page 5

PRESS REACTIONS IN BRITAIN TO WHITE PAPER ON NATION’S ECONOMY

DISAPPOINTMENT FELT THAT ONLY PARTIAL REMEDIES ARE LISTED

(From F. G. Webber, Special Correspondent, N.Z.P.A.) Recd. 5.30 p.m. London, Feb. 22, Although the British Press, without party distinction, recognises that the Government has sen ted a frank and detailed diagnosis of the economic state of the nation, disappointment is expressed that only a partial prescription is offered.

Industrial circles, as reported by the “Financial Times” express doubts as to whether the target of 200,000,000 tons of coal is set high enough, and ask for more specific attention to the needs of other industries. Conservatives, as represented by the “Daily Telegraph,” ask whether the Government is really facing realities when it insists on continuing with “grandolse nationalisation schemes” when its whole energies should be concentrated upon reaching the targets it sets for coal production and manpower. The “Telegraph” asks whether, in view of the extreme gravity of the manpower situation. Britain can afford to maintain 665,000 more Jcivil servants than before the war, and whether, on her Import programme, she can afford to spend £68,000,000 on tobacco and films, while only £60,000,000 is allocated to purchase new machinery and ships.

The Liberal “Manchester Guardian" *and London “News Chronicle” both criticise the White Paper for failure to provide more positive remedies and emphasise that these remedies must be provided without further delay. “We cannot afford to ponder over our misery,” says the “News Chronicle.” “We know the worst. It is a case of retrench, reform and rise again. But if we are ever to rise again we must get moving soon.” “The Economist,” in an article written before the appearance of the White Paper and published in the “Financial Times,” which is giving the “Economist” harbourag’e while the publication of weeklies is suspended, vigorously attacks the Government for lack of leadership and says the choice before Mr. Attlee Is whether he will act as a party politician or as a statesman. The Labour Government, says “The Economist,” has no right to claim to represent the "mass of the people,” when in fact it was returned on the votes of only 48 per cent, of them. If Mr. Attlee is prepared to give a lead to the whole nation he must not try, in the name of half the people, to fore? his doctrines upon the other half. It is for the Prime Minister to decide whether he will go down fighting as a party leader, or whether he will act as the chairman of a gigantic working committee, pledged to make a realistic examination of the nation’s needs and evolve policies to meet them. The “Daily Herald,” organ of the Labour Party, says: “If the warnings contained in the White Paper are ignored Britain will be headed for pauperhood. Obviously, the country must concentrate upon essentials and put first things first. The White Paper contains a plan for recovery which must be carried out.” These extracts represent the general burden of newspaper comment, but it is too early yet to know how far these represent the varying shades of public opinion, or how far this latest cold, economic douche has impressed the people, already preoccupied with immediate problems of keeping the home fires burning in spite of the blizzards and fuel economy. The Government has printed 100,000 copies of the White Paper and is prepared to publish many more for general distribution. The document itself is couched in studiously plain and unofficial language. Its 32 pages are split into 141 short paragraphs. Words like “‘we” and “our” are frequently used and words like “must" are italicised for emphasis.