Tory Reform—The Old, Old Story
A group of Conservative Members of Parliament, over forty of them, have drawn up a Statement, and formed themselves into the Tory Reform Committee. As a result, they say, of joint work on a number of separate issues, like the Beveridge Report, Post-War Reconstruction, the Catering Bill, Civil Aviation, War Pensions, Education, and so on, they have found “that there exists among us a common outlook on the principles which should govern the conduct of political affairs.”
We are therefore dealing with a considered written statement by an influential group of prominent Tory M.P.s—(Forward! by the right; a Statement by the Tory Reform Committee)—giving some indication of their estimate of the shape of things to come, and their reaction to them.
They start off with what will probably be the main theme of the Armistice and post-war years : —
“The spirit of National Unity, developed in war and consecrated on the battlefields, must be preserved in the period of reconstruction.
The chief task of statesmanship will be to maintain that unity, and carry that spirit on into the years of peace.
There must be give and take between all classes of the community, between employers and workers … if the national objectives are to be obtained.” (p. 2.)
We can certainly agree with Viscount Hinchingbrooke there. As usual, we the workers will give, and they, the Tory employers—will take.
We are very promptly informed in the next point what the spirit of national unity is for : —
“The standard of living of this country can only be restored and improved if maximum production is regarded as the joint responsibility of capital, management and labour, working as partners.” (p. 3.)
The next bit is almost word for word what we read in Mr. Arthur Deakin’s articles in the Transport Workers’ Record : —
“We consider that a man who invests his skill and labour in an industry should feel an interest in and exercise an influence over that industry, equal in degree, if not in kind, to that exercised by the man who invests his savings.” (p. 3.)
So that’s where the Hon. W. W. Astor and Sir Alfred Beit got their wealth—they saved it up.
“To this end we welcome the extension of Production Committees.” (p. 3.)
After saying that Trade Unions will help in the future towards “increased efficiency,” they pronounce against the retention of war-time controls—”management must be given full and unhampered freedom.”
Two further great reforms are income-tax collection on current earnings and “a prosperous agriculture.” Then comes Compulsory Military Service.
“We regard Compulsory Military Service as an essential part of our democratic system.” (p. 4.)
The reason for Compulsory Military Service (Conscription) is given in the next spasm : —
“Only as a United Commonwealth can we play our proper part with America, Russia and China in any international organisation which may be devised for world security. (p. 5.)
It will no longer be sufficient to say that each part of the Empire is primarily responsible for its own local defence unless at the same time adequate Imperial forces of all arms are so disposed throughout the world that they can be moved in sufficient time to defend any thrfiatened points. (p. 5.)
“We recognise the need to ensure that British industry is at least as well equipped as that of its industrial rivals,” they say.
They require the maintenance of high standards of “industrial efficiency” (p. 8). They hold a substantial increase in our export trade to be essential “if this country is ever to regain the standard of living to which it has been accustomed.” which can only be achieved “if industry is enterprising in the quest for markets” (p. 9). They want the birth-rate to be increased (Family Allowances).
There must be “state ownership of certain monopolies,” and a revival of “a widespread healthy and vigorous private enterprise.” (p. 10.)
A point for the Labour Party : —
“The nationalisation of the Bank of England would therefore make no practical difference.” (p. 12.)
Finally, they say on Demobilisation and Resettlement : —
“At the end of the last war, carefully prepared plans had to be abandoned because the Services did not understand, and therefore would not accept them. (p. 14.)
SUMMING UP.
No Socialist ever expected the Conservative Party, not oven its Reform Committee, to have any proposals whatever for the solution of to-day’s social problem.
We have cited the actual written words of their own publication on policy, to show that their only possible idea at the conclusion of this war is to start all over again, still more scientifically, with Conscription, the Beveridge Report, increased efficiency, better education, greater export trade, larger share of the market, increased armaments—the same old game of a dog chasing its own tail, which leaves the worker in the same position as before.
Stupid workers who are led away by this sort of rubbish, or the feeble imitation of it called the Labour Party, or the I.L.P., cannot expect anything else than hard work, low wages and insecurity until the next war, when a new Tory Reform Committee will issue “the old, old story that is ever new.”
HORATIO