NATIONALISING INDUSTRIES

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24900, 13 June 1946, Page 5

NATIONALISING INDUSTRIES

BRITISH COAL BILL “BOLD EXPERIMENT” PLANS DISCUSSED AT LABOUR CONFERENCE LONDON. July 11. “The Coal Bill Is a bold, audacious experiment, on which the future of the Labour Pariy might depend,” said the Minister of Fuel (Mr E. Shinwell) at the Labour Party Conference at Bournemouth, when introducing the Executive Committee’s report on the Government’s nationalisation programme. He added: “If it fails we cannot hope to promote further schemes. Tne nationalisation experiment must succeed. I believe that it will.” Whatever terms of compensation were arranged, Mr Shinwell said, he was convinced that the nationalisation of the mines wbuld be a financial success, It was imperative that they must not be subsidised by the Exchequer. The Government also intended to nationalise electricity. Mr Shinwell said he was preparing a bill to make electricity available to every person and industry which desired it. The nationalisation of gas would follow. The nationalisation schemes, taken by and large, must not be subsidised by the Exchequer. Later, within the present Parliament, the Government would take the gas industry "in its stride.” Once the Government had nationalised coal, electricity, and gas under the aegis of the National Fuel and Power Corporation, it would have at its disposal an instrument of great power and influence, and it could proceed further along the path of nationalisation. Transport, iron and Steel ‘We propose to deal with the transport industry and the railways,” said Mr Shinwell. “If they are to pay their way they cannot, be divorced from road transport. This will be embodied in legislation and become an actual fact very soon. ‘ The same appliea to iron and steel.” Warning that the opponents of nationalisation were still strong and influential, Mr Shinwell said that the remaining influence and power might later reflect itself in the House of Lords. If it did, the Labour Party must be ready to fight. Turning to petrol rationing. Mr Shmwell declared that he hoped to emerge in due course from “these irrational and sometimes irritating restrictions,” He added that rationing was not only a question of dollars, but one involving oil interests. This was “just about as tricky a problem as confronts the Government. Unless we apply ourselves to the problem with diplomacy, due care, and foresight we may find ourselves involved in a disaster.” Resolutions Criticise Government In spite of opposition by the party’s executive to two resolutions criticising the Government’s publicity and public relations machinery, the conference endorsed both resolutions. Speakers for the resolutions complained that the Government’s propaganda was inadequate and that the Government had lost*’many supporters since the last election. Mr Arthur Greenwood, when voicing the executive’s opposition to the rear - lutions, was frequently interrupted by delegates. There were cries of “No” when Mr Greenwood declared that propaganda was the duty of the rank and file of the party. He considered tnat tne resolutions were unnecessary P re i u dicial to the party’s cause and that they would give a misleading impression that Labour was losing its hold on the country.