Reported in Hansard
The Day to Day Struggle—Meat Sandwich Front
Mr. Piratin (Communist, Mile End): “While I agree with the right hon. lady [Dr. Edith Summerskill] that it is important to fix the price for meat sandwiches, a meat sandwich might be as thin as a wafer or as thick as a coin. Is not the fact, as the hon. Member has said, that a sandwich may be 6d. one day and 8d. for exactly the same kind the next, something which the Minister could look into?” (Motion to annul Meat [Retail Prices] Order, 25/5/49.)
Workers! Advice from a Conservative
Mr. G. B. Drayson (Conservative, Skipton): “. . . The present danger to workers in this country is not that they are likely to produce themselves out of work. If one looks around at the devastation caused in our cities by war, one is amazed that the building industry still indulges in certain practices which hamper production. Surely there is enough work for generations of builders. When it is realised what a tremendous demand there is for goods: not only to re-equip our homes but also to supply markets overseas, there should be no fear that they can produce themselves out of work. What they can do is to price themselves out of work, by making the cost of our goods overseas so high that no one will be prepared to buy them.” (On the motion for the Adjournment, 13/5/49.)
Are You Convinced Now?
Mr. Ness Edwards (Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour): “In the old days men felt that if they worked hard they would work themselves out of a job. Today they have full employment. By and large, there are jobs for everybody. If they work hard they do not necessarily become unemployed . . . Workers in industry have the assurance that if in their employment they play the game by the country, they will not, as a consequence, become unemployed . . . .” (On the motion for the Adjournment. Productivity. 13/5/49.)
Irresponsible Workers
Mr. F. Messer (Labour, Tottenham South): “. . . It may be—one never knows what the people of this country are going to do, because sometimes they are most irresponsible—that at some future time there will be a Tory government . . .” (National Health Service Amendment BUI, 24/5/49.)
A Tory on the Next Depression
Mr. Brendan Bracken (Conservative, Bournemouth): “. . . I aver with sorrow that we are entering into times of depression. How deep that depression, I know not… ” (Debate on Fuel and Power, 19/5/49.)
Nationalisation—Before and After
Sir F. Sanderson (Conservative, Ealing East) asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the profits of the Bank of England have been since nationalisation; and whether they show an increase or decrease on the last pre-nationalisation figures.
Mr. Glenvil Hall (Financial Secretary to the Treasury): “Since the Bank of England Act, 1946, came into force, the Bank have paid to the Treasury £873,180 half-yearly in lieu of dividend, as provided in Section .1(4) of the Act. This is the same amount as the half-yearly dividend previously paid on Bank of England Stock. The balance of profit after provision for the half-yearly payment is carried to the Rest, to which was previously carried any balance of profits after provision for the half-yearly dividend ; these movements are shown in the Bank Return.” (Written Questions).
Capitalist Economies—from a Labour Party Capitalist
Mr. R. R. Stokes (Labour, Ipswich): “. . . In regard to export business, people ought to be encouraged to make more profit on their goods, and the stigma on making profits ought to be removed. The stigma ought to be put, and ought to be emphasised, on how the profits ought to be distributed. I see no harm whatever in making larger and wider margins. I would sack any managing director who was not making twice as much profit today as he did before the war . . .” (Second Reading of Finance Bill, 18/5/49.)
Tory Support for Trade Unions
Mr. W. Shepherd (Conservative, Bucklow): “I think that any attack upon the unions at the present time in this country would be most improper. I know the difficulties which the union leaders have today in carrying their own supporters with them …. I sympathise with the attitude that the unions have to take up, and I say that there are no better industrial organisations anywhere than the trade unions in this country. I think that our union leaders today are an example to the whole world, and I wish them well in the task which they have to fulfil. (On the motion for the Adjournment. Productivity. 13/5/49.)
Fair Play for Industry—says a Labourite
Mr. W. R. Williams (Labour, Heston and Isleworth): “. . . Some of us connected with industry have all our lives been saying that the basic principle in industry must be a good day’s work for a good day’s pay. It was not until we came within a reasonable distance of a decent day’s pay and decent conditions of work and welfare that we had any time left over to deal with the converse side of industry. After having convinced our people of their rights and what is a proper return for their labour, we are now quite rightly asking them to do the right thing by industry in return.” (On the motion for the Adjournment. Productivity. 13/5/49.)
Three Cheers for Labour Government—from the Workers ?
Mr. J. Diamond (Labour, Blackley): “. . . The Government have been most helpful in encouraging private enterprise to play its proper part, and private enterprise has decided, although somewhat belatedly, to swim with the current instead of against it, and, as a result, while using the same energy to produce more, has achieved, with the help of the Government, extraordinarily satisfactory results for which the thanks of everybody in all quarters of the House ought to go out . . . ” (On the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, 17/5/49.)
Nasty Foreigners!
Mr. R. R. Stokes (Labour, Ipswich): “. . . I must say that I am in some doubt about this question of bulk buying unless we are bulk buying with people who play the same game. It seems to me that bulk buying is O.K. in the Commonwealth and certain other countries, but when we are dealing with a lot of foreigners who cheat, it is extremely difficult to conduct it successfully …” (On the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, 17/5/49.)
New Ways of Spelling SLUMP
Mr. Brendan Bracken (Conservative, Bournemouth): “ Some hon. Members opposite seem to doubt my statement that our export industries must soon face a depression. Now, ‘depression’ is an unfashionable word. When I was very young I had an opportunity of witnessing the great slump in the United States, and nobody objected to that being called a depression. But in the middle ’thirties America was afflicted by another great weakening in sales, and the politicians, who had to win elections, declared that this sad development could not be called a depression. They said, ‘ Anyone who calls this new development, the falling-off of sales, a depression is foolish. He is the sort of man who will neither believe in Moses nor the prophets.’ Then, of course, Americans had to invent a new name, and they called the depression of the middle ’thirties a ‘recession.’ Today the Americans have found a new name for the decline in sales—and, let me remind the Minister, a heavy decline in oil sales. They are not willing to call it a depression, and I must say that their new name is a very attractive one: they call it ‘a slide’ . . . ” (Debate on Fuel and Power, 19/5/49.)
S.H.