• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Rt. Hon. Anthony Eden
 Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley Wood
 Ralph Assheton
 Rt. Hon. L. S. Amery
 Rt. Hon. Sir Stafford Cripps
 Lord Greene
 Rt. Hon. Oliver Lyttelton
 Rt. Hon. Sir Stafford Cripps
 Rt. Hon. Ernest Brown
 Rt. Hon. Viscount Cranborne
 Back Matter














Title: British speeches of the day
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076217/00003
 Material Information
Title: British speeches of the day
Physical Description: 5 v. : ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: British Information Services
Publisher: British Information Services,
British Information Services
Place of Publication: New York
Publication Date: May 1943
Frequency: monthly
regular
 Subjects
Subject: World War, 1939-1945 -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Great Britain -- 1945-   ( lcsh )
Foreign relations -- Periodicals -- Great Britain   ( lcsh )
Genre: federal government publication   ( marcgt )
periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Began with Mar. 1943.
Dates or Sequential Designation: -v. 5, no. 5 (June 1947).
General Note: At head of title: British Information Services, an agency of the British government.
General Note: Description based on: Vol. 4, no. 1 (Feb. 1946); title from cover.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076217
Volume ID: VID00003
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 01412079
lccn - 45006482

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Rt. Hon. Anthony Eden
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
    Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley Wood
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Ralph Assheton
        Page 10
    Rt. Hon. L. S. Amery
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
    Rt. Hon. Sir Stafford Cripps
        Page 14
        Page 15
    Lord Greene
        Page 16
        Page 17
    Rt. Hon. Oliver Lyttelton
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
    Rt. Hon. Sir Stafford Cripps
        Page 22
        Page 23
    Rt. Hon. Ernest Brown
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
    Rt. Hon. Viscount Cranborne
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
    Back Matter
        Page 33
Full Text



BRITISH INFORMATION SERVICtS
AN AGENCY OF THE BRITISH OV RV 4RN'MIEiNT





BRITISH SPEECHES

OF THE DAY

ANTHONY EDEN, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, April 8, 1943.
Visit to the United States and Canada.
SIR KINGSLEY WOOD, Chancellor of the Exchequer, April 12, 1943.
The Budget.
RALPH ASSHETON, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, April 13, 1943.
Daily National Expenditure.
L. S. AMERY, Secretary of State for India, March 30, 1943.
India.
SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS, Minister of Aircraft Production, April 20, 1943.
Aircraft Production.
LORD GREENE, Master of the Rolls, April 2, 1943.
National Conciliation Scheme for the Coal Mining Industry.
OLIVER LYTTELTON, Minister of Production, April 2, 1943.
The Scientist in War Production.
SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS, Minister of Aircraft Production, April 17, 1943.
International Organization After the War.
ERNEST BROWN, Minister of Health, March 26, 1943.
Health Services and Group Practice.
VISCOUNT CRANBOR)"' Prii, ^ rch 25, 1943.
Refugees. '0 9 I


Number 3 ay, Issued May 1943
No-5 --
NEW YORK . . . 30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA . . Circle 6-5100
WASHINGTON, D. C. . .1336 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W. .. Executive 8525
CHICAGO . . . 360 NORTH MICHIGAN AVENUE . Andover 1733
SAN FRANCISCO . .. 260 CALIFORNIA STREET . . .Sutter 6634







RT. HON. ANTHONY EDEN
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
House of Commons, April 8, 1943
I take this opportunity to make to the House a brief report of the
visit which I have recently made to the United States at the invitation
of the United States Government, and to Canada on the invitation of
the Canadian Government. I need hardly tell the House that I was
very glad to accept both these invitations. More than a year ago it
fell to my lot to pay a visit to Moscow, where I had a conversation
about political questions, both present and future, with M. Stalin
and M. Molotov. I therefore welcomed all the more cordially this
opportunity to have similar discussions with the United States Gov-
ernment. The House may perhaps notice that the terms of the com-
munique issued on my arrival were very wide. I can assure the House
that the discussions were equally wide in scope. I can assure the
House too that nothing could have exceeded the cordiality shown by
everyone in the United States and in Canada to their British visitor.
The President himself was very liberal in the time that he gave to
me. I had repeated conferences with him, both alone and in company
with his advisers. I was, during the latter part of my stay in Wash-
ington, his guest at the White House. Mr. Cordell Hull equally ex-
tended to me a most generous welcome, and he instructed his Depart-
ment to place itself, during the period of our visit, entirely at the
disposal of myself and my colleagues from the Foreign Office, a ges-
ture which, I can assure the House, was deeply appreciated, and of
which we made the fullest use in our power.
I think perhaps it would be appropriate if I were to tell the House
at this point that with the full approval of my right hon. Friend the
Prime Minister I extended, while I was in Washington, an invitation
to the American Secretary of State to come and pay us a visit in this
country at any time convenient to him during the course of the sum-
mer. I am sure the House will endorse me when I say that if he does
find it possible to come, he will have the most cordial welcome, both
on his own account and on account of the great country he represents.
Frank Exchanges
I also had the advantage of meeting Vice-President Wallace and,
I think, every member of the Cabinet of the United States. But there
was one particular opportunity which I had of which I must give a
special account to this House, for it was of a Parliamentary char-
acter. Thanks to the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee
of the Senate, Senator Connally [and] the Chairman of the Foreign Af-
fairs Committee of the House of Representatives, Representative Sol
Bloom, I was able to have informal discussion with members of the
two Committees drawn from both parties in the two Houses of Con-
gress. The House, of course, is aware of the important part these
Committees play in the national life and in the policy of the United
States. That for me was a most valuable experience. We exchanged
views very freely off the record to my very great advantage and, I
hope, perhaps just a little bit to theirs too. At any rate the exchanges
were frank and ranged over every topic and every view. During a
brief interval, a week end, I spent a little time in New York, where







I was able to meet other prominent American political figures, such
as Mr. Hoover, Mayor La Guardia and Mr. Willkie, and also many
writers for the Press and commentators on the air, for whose cour-
tesy to me I must express my thanks. Thus I think the House will
see that I had a pretty wide opportunity of gauging and trying to
understand the various trends of opinion in the United States at
this time.
The conversations in which I was engaged fall broadly under
three chapter headings. The first was what I may call operational
matters, that is to say, immediate questions concerned with the con-
duct of the war of a type and character that do not normally fall
under the aegis of the Foreign Office. These are the type of questions
which arise always, in times of war between two Allies engaged in
a common struggle, and the opportunity of a visit by a member of
the War Cabinet is taken to try to regulate or make progress with
them. These questions quite evidently are not such as I can describe
and present to this House at the present time, but on this subject I
think that both the Prime Minister and I were well satisfied with the
progress made.
The second chapter heading covers the question of political co-
operation between us in connection with actual military operations
that have taken place or that will take place. It is obvious to the
House that as the war progresses it becomes more and more important
that there should be close co-ordination in the political sphere as in
the military sphere, and in some respects, may I say, it is more dif-
ficult to obtain, because you may be faced with political developments
as a result of military action which no man can foresee. It remains
true that if we can get this close political co-ordination, if we have a
close understanding, at least we are better able to stand the strains
and stresses which will inevitably arise as the military campaigns
progress. That is what we sought to do.

Relations With the Vichy Government
I would like to give one example, which I think may interest the
House, of the difficulties. I take North Africa. There is no doubt that
it is felt in the United States that there has been some misunderstand-
ing in this country of the purposes the United States Administration
had in mind in maintaining relations with Vichy. I can assure the
House that their motive for doing that was not special tenderness
for Vichy but because they thought, and we agreed with them, that
by maintaining relations with Vichy it was possible to keep open a use-
ful window on Europe which must otherwise be shut. I have no doubt
that we were right and that they were right. Let me take another
example. It was only through the maintenance of those relations
that the American Government was able to place a considerable
number of agents in North Africa who were quite invaluable in paving
the way for the arrival of the Allied troops. No such thing would
have been possible had not those relations been maintained. It was
quite clear to me that many in the United States feel that we have
not understood the motives which prompted their action and
have attributed to them a tenderness for Vichy or P6tain or Laval
and the rest of them which in fact they do not feel. I mention that
to show that that is the kind of topic which it is invaluable should
be talked out between those responsible in the two countries. At any







rate, we did talk it out, and I am satisfied that as regards future policy
towards France there is complete agreement between us. We and
the United States have only one desire, to see all sections of the French
people who are prepared to fight the common enemy united together.
We will do what we can to help them to unite, though it is not always
a very easy task.

Relations With Allied and Neutral Countries
We examined, as well as that, our common policy in respect of
Spain, Portugal, Turkey and the other remaining neutrals in Europe
and agreed on our policy in all respects in regard to those countries.
We examined together conditions in other parts of Europe, both
enemy Europe and enemy-occupied countries. We agreed that our
common policy would be strengthened by the freest exchange of our
knowledge of what was going on in those countries and of our inter-
pretation of the information that came to us, and we have certain
plans which are being elaborated for trying to improve the exchange
of information under this head. As regards the occupied countries
there is only one policy which we and the United States Government
are pursuing, which is to do all in our power to restore to them their
full liberty at the earliest possible moment.
That was the second chapter heading. The third was described
in the communique as "Other questions arising out of the war," so
that these subjects covered the widest range. They included such
questions as the practical problems which will arise on the surrender
of the enemy, and the task which will face the United States Govern-
ment, our Government, the Soviet Government, the Chinese Govern-
ment, and the other Governments of the United Nations, in safe-
guarding the world against further aggression. As the President has
made plain in his published statement, on all those topics we found
a very close similarity of outlook. Admittedly, these exchanges were
entirely exploratory in character. They neither committed the Amer-
ican Government nor ourselves, nor could they do so, because other
Governments have to be consulted and exchanges have to take place
with those Governments. The last thing we wanted to do was to pre-
sent our Allies with a hard and fast agreement reached between the
two of us. That was never in our minds. I have come back greatly
encouraged by the large measure of general agreement we found. I
am certain that that will be of great value to us in the further ex-
changes we shall have, both with the United States and with other
Governments who are our Allies.
The Right Basis for Anglo-U. S. Relations
Perhaps I may be allowed here one observation on the nature of
our relations generally with the Government and people of the United
States. I think it is a mistake to attempt to base those relations
mainly upon sentiment. We might not always like each other very
much. I think it is also a mistake to try to base them on common
origin, or common parentage, or even common language, because
there will be occasions when we differ one from the other. But I think
it is desirable to base them on their true foundation, which is a
common interest in the maintenance of world peace and in prevent-
ing a repetition of these catastrophic world conflicts every 20 years.
If we keep to that foundation, we shall be in less danger of the ups







and downs which we have sometimes seen in Anglo-American rela-
tions. I believe that definition to be profoundly true, and I believe
it to be well understood on both sides of the Atlantic at the present
time.
We, here, recognize the need for some authority to ensure by
force that neither Germany, Italy nor Japan should be able to repeat
their aggression. I believe the American people share that view and
that if this authority is to be effective all peace-loving nations will
have to contribute their part too. Of the last 30 years, we in this
country have spent eight at war with Germany and nobody can yet
say when will be the end of the present struggle. I reported to the
United States Government that if I could judge the temper of the
people here aright there was no disposition, when this struggle was
over, to trust to luck and hope for the best, and I found exactly the
same view in the United States. Therefore, I say that while it would
be the height of unwisdom to cease to concentrate our thought and
effort on the main task of winning the war, while it would be a mis-
take to distract ourselves with many prolonged public debates on
post-war problems, at the same time it is necessary that the Govern-
ments of the countries principally concerned shall begin now to make
certain preparations so that they may not be completely unready
when the moment comes. It seems to me that the matter was very
well expressed by Mr. Sumner Welles a little while ago when he said:
"We cannot afford to permit the basic issues by which the
destiny of humanity will be determined to be resolved, without
prior agreement, by a group of harassed statesmen working
against time."
Our conversations in Washington were intended to safeguard against
just that danger. They constitute a beginning. A start has been made
in the best conditions and I claim no more for them than that. They
will be followed up.
Before I leave the United States perhaps the House will bear with
me on just two matters, not in the same sense essentially political, to
which I would refer and which I think may be of interest. The chief
public occasion which it fell to my lot to attend in the United States
was a Joint Session of the two Houses of the Legislature of Maryland,
and after my speech in that historic Senate House, the Legislature were
good enough to pass a Resolution in the most generous terms towards
the people of this country. Not only did they pass one, but a number
of other State Legislatures pursued the same course and I think the
House would wish me to read the Resolution passed by the Maryland
Legislature, so that they may, if they will, endorse my action in ex-
pressing thanks for its terms. This is what it says:
"Be it resolved by the House of Delegates of Maryland, in
solemn assembly gathered, that it hereby formally registers for
itself and for the citizens of Maryland whom it represents, its
deep respect for the impressive battle given by our valiant Britan-
nic Ally in her mortal conflict with the Axis Powers, a respect
firmly based upon the known qualities of the British people, their
unconquerable resolution in the cause which they and we deem
to be right, their refusal to admit thoughts of defeat even in their
darkest hours, their phenomenal energy, their astonishing self-
discipline, their noble effort to, cling to the paths of honor despite
the indecencies of the enemy; in a word, upon all those traits by







which a people comes to be known as great and to be admired
accordingly.
Be it further resolved that rather than commend the example
to the people of Maryland as has been done so often and so warmly
in the past, the House of Delegates takes this occasion to express
to the people of Britain through her Foreign Minister the highest
compliment of which it feels capable, the sincere desire to emulate
their greatness;
And be it further resolved that these Resolutions be spread
upon the journal and that the Speaker through his Excellency
Governor O'Conor deliver a copy of these Resolutions to Mr. Eden
in person."
I think the House will feel that that is a very generous message. I
wish that time allowed me to read the others, but it does not.
Wholehearted in the Struggle
One other experience I would refer to. For two or three days I
was fortunate enough to go down into the deep South, in the company
of General Marshall, the much-esteemed Chief-of-Staff of the Amer-
ican Forces. There, I saw a very large number of camps, containing,
most of them, tens of thousands of airmen and soldiers. I was deeply
impressed with what I saw and with the spirit of these young men.
Their equipment and their accommodation were first-class, as one
would expect in the United States. It was also a pleasing experience
to see Sherman tanks firing, even if it was only at bits of wood. But
all that one would expect to be good. What was remarkable was the
spirit of those men. I am convinced that nowhere in the world is
there a finer reservoir of really first-class material than among these
troops and airmen in the United States of America.
One final experience. For a day I was able to go to see something
of the American Naval Forces and also of these bases, in the company
of an old and valued friend of Anglo-American relations, Colonel
Knox, and there I had an experience which was especially stimulating.
It was to see one of our greatest battleships, which has been repaired
in an American yard, now almost complete and to see her crew, and
to learn from them, at first hand, how splendid during many months
had been their relations and their friendship with their comrades in
the United States. There is immense value for the future in the work
done here and in America for understanding between our two Serv-
ices. My closing impression of the United States was one of a young
and vigorous people, wholehearted in the struggle and determined
to work together with the other United Nations, in the war and in
the peace.
Canadian Visit
Now for a few minutes, if the House will allow me, I want to
travel to Canada, where I spent three days in Ottawa at the invitation
of the Prime Minister. They were very crowded days. I had the
opportunity of meeting those responsible for Canada's truly amazing
war effort. I had two meetings with the War Committee, which cor-
responds roughly with our own War Cabinet here at home. I told
them of my talks in Washington and we exchanged views on many
matters of common interest to us. Then I addressed a Joint Session
of the Canadian Parliament-members of the Senate and members







of the House of Commons-and there, I regret to have to report, that,
all unwittingly, I committed a gross breach of the Censorship rules.
I informed the Canadian Parliament that we were now meeting "in
another place"; but I did go on to assure them that we were doing
so in excellent spirits despite the action of the enemy and the august
nature of our new surroundings. I would like once again here to pay
our tribute to Canada's record of achievement. I came away with the
impression of a great people, steadfast and loyal in the struggle,
proud to be a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations, and
proud, too, of its splendid loyalty in our darkest hour. I am the bearer
of a message of good will from the Canadian Parliament, which I
would like to read to the House. It was voiced in the concluding words
of the Prime Minister's speech. Mr. Mackenzie King said:
"In conclusion, Mr. Eden, may I ask you on your return to
Britain if you will take with you the most loyal of greetings and
expressions of devotion from His Majesty's Canadian subjects
to the King and Queen? Will you also take with you the warmest
and best wishes to the Prime Minister of Britain? Tell Mr.
Churchill how relieved we all were at his speedy recovery after
the unfortunate indisposition he suffered on his return from North
Africa, and tell him we do hope and pray that he will continue to
the end to enjoy the vision, wisdom and the endurance which he
has manifested from the beginning in his conduct of the affairs
of this war. And tell him, and tell all the people of Britain, that
Canada is heart and soul with them in this struggle, and we shall
continue so to remain until the fight itself is ended and victory
and peace have been achieved."
In my time it has fallen to my lot to visit many foreign capitals, on
a variety of missions. It is always difficult to assess the value of such
visits. There are always imponderables, incalculable factors, which
it is difficult to estimate at that time. I can only say sincerely to the
House, that I feel convinced myself that no other mission with which I
have been charged has been so fundamentally worth while as this. I
have come back, I say frankly, with a different view of the sentiments
of the United States towards both this struggle and the post-war period.
I believe that the opportunities that have been opened to us, great
as the difficulties are, are wider in scope than I thought possible. If,
as a result of these conversations, to however small an extent, I have
been able to make a contribution to Anglo-American relations, I shall
feel that nothing could have been more worth while.



RT. HON. SIR KINGSLEY WOOD
Chancellor of the Exchequer
House of Commons, April 12, 1943
[Two Extracts from the Budget Speech]
Lend-Lease
The American people have never put the dollar sign in the help
that they have given us, and we are not putting the pound sign in
the help we give back to them or give to others.







$680,000,000 Worth of Munitions to Russia
Let me illustrate why precise reckoning is beside the mark. Let
us first take our great and gallant Ally, Russia. On Red Army day
my right hon. Friend the Minister of Production stated that from the
beginning of October, 1941, to the end of December, 1942, we had
despatched to Russia some 3,000 tanks, 2,500 aircraft, 70,000,000
rounds of small arms ammunition and 50,000 tons of precious stocks
of rubber. In very round figures the value, if we sought for a moment
to estimate it, of the munitions that we have already given to Russia
is about 170,000,000. More than that, the Northern waters on the
way to Russia tell the story not only of how British ships and men
have taken the cargoes safely through, but of British ships sunk and
British lives lost in our determination not only to give these supplies
but to get them to Russia. We do not make a balance-sheet of items
like these any more than we can ever compute in such terms the
defence and victory of Stalingrad or the debt we and the whole world
owe to Russia for its wonderful and outstanding achievement in the
common cause. To other European Allies we are giving aid in the
same spirit and in the same way. We are also giving aid on Lend-
Lease terms to China to assist in her stout-hearted resistance against
Japanese aggression. Transport difficulties at present reduce the full
flow of that aid, but stocks are being steadily accumulated, and as
transport improves they will go forward to play their part in the
final and complete destruction of our common enemy Japan.

From Britain to the United States
It is natural that the largest amount of our Reciprocal Aid goes
to the Americans, and that for a quite simple reason. The growing
American Forces who are in this country or who are stationed within
the areas for which we are responsible receive, apart from their pay
and from the necessary supplies they bring with them, everything
they ask for, which we are able to give, as Reciprocal Aid. Much of
this Reciprocal Aid takes the form of services whose value neither
they nor we seek to reckon. Who puts a price upon the service we
gave when we took over, largely in our own ships, the American
Expeditionary Force safely to North Africa? Who puts a value on
the free access we have gladly given them to all our important war
inventions or lessons of experience in the production and supply of
war equipment? It may, however, be said, by way of example, that
we are spending about 150,000,000 in constructing aerodromes, bar-
racks, hospitals and other buildings expressly for American use. Mr.
Stettinius, the Administrator of Lend-Lease in the United States, gave
Congress a remarkable inventory of the type of aid we provide to the
American Forces, and Major Spiegelberg, the staff member of the
Lend-Lease Administration in London, quoted a vivid figure to show
how completely we had tried to provide the American Forces in this
country with all they wanted.
From June to January last the total expenditure of the American
Army authorities in making purchases in this country was no more
than 250,000. As Major Spiegelberg said, this is a drop in the bucket
compared with the cost of maintaining an army. All the rest of the
articles, equipment, facilities and services required for the United
States Forces and available in the United Kingdom are procured as







Reciprocal Aid from the British. In the last seven months of last
year from our own resources we furnished to the American Forces
in the United Kingdom a quantity of supplies which would have in-
volved 1,200,000 tons of shipping, which was more than the Americans
themselves shipped to their own troops in the same period. We pro-
vided about 1,600,000 tons of construction materials and made avail-
able 700,000 dead-weight tons of shipping for American military
operations. It seems a long time since the Prime Minister, in prophetic
utterance, said that we and the Americans would find ourselves greatly
mixed up during the war. We are all liking and benefiting from the
mixture, and we shall continue it.
The Committee will appreciate that the total cost of all this
Reciprocal Aid is a very large sum. We do not attempt to keep close
accounts. It would take a whole division of accountants and clerks
to keep such figures, and we cannot spare them for such a purpose. If
we take the Lend-Lease aid now being furnished to the United King-
dom, apart from the additional aid to British Armies overseas, and
make a rough comparison on the same scale of costs and values, the
Committee should know that, large though the help from the United
States is, it is no greater than the help we ourselves are affording
to all our Allies without charge. Having regard to the comparative
size of our population and to the proportion of men and women we
have already absorbed in the Forces and to the longer period in
which we have been bearing the struggle, the scale of our reciprocal
help is one of which we need not be ashamed. We should not forget
that Reciprocal Aid is operating also on a considerable scale in
Australia and New Zealand, as well as in India and in the Colonial
Empire. This is a further source of strength to the Allied cause ..
Stabilization Policy
In the forefront of the measures which we have taken during the
war to remove the threat of inflation is our policy of stabilization
of prices. It has wide significance, and it involves a considerable an-
nual charge upon the Exchequer. In my Budget speech of April,
1941, I undertook to hold the cost-of-living index number, apart from
minor seasonal changes, within the range of 125 to 130 in terms
of the pre-war level. That endeavor has been rewarded with a full
measure of success. The cost-of-living index has been successfully
stabilized. It has at no time risen higher than 30 per cent. above
the pre-war level, and for most of the time it has been below that
figure. So far as food is concerned, the food index last month was 20
per cent. above the level at the outbreak of war, as compared with
23 per cent. in April, 1941. It is sometimes suggested that while the
items falling within the cost-of-living index have been stabilized in
price, this has not prevented many other prices from soaring. The
new material provided in Section C of the White Paper shows that,
taking the general price level as a whole, this is not correct. Apart
from price increases deliberately brought about by higher indirect
taxes, the whole volume of consumption goods and services, including
luxury goods and other non-necessaries, has not risen in price by
more than 36 per cent. It is not undesirable that the less necessary
goods should show a greater price increase than necessaries. The
rise of 36 per cent. over the whole field apart from taxes is, I think,
in a proper relationship to the rise of 30 per cent. or thereabouts in







the cost-of-living index, on which the effect of war taxes has been
slight.
The success of our stabilization policy has been achieved by a
firm control of prices, coupled with some application of subsidies
and remission of taxation when control has been secured. It has been
a cardinal point of policy that subsidies and tax remission should not
be granted until an effective control of prices, and in most cases also
of supply, has been obtained. For example, there has been no general
remission of the Purchase Tax on clothing, but utility cloth, which
unlike other clothing is manufactured under the close supervision of
the Board of Trade, has during the past year been made free of Pur-
chase Tax. Subsidies, moreover, have not been directed exclusively
to price stabilization but have also included expenditure incurred
primarily for nutritional reasons, like the national milk scheme and
the school meals scheme. In pursuance of this policy, control has been
extended step by step over prices of food and other essential com-
modities, and in respect of food prices control now covers probably
90 per cent. of the average housewife's expenditure. The cost of the
stabilization policy to the Exchequer has been substantial, and it is
now running at the rate of about 180,000,000 a year, but it has been
of great benefit, not least to those who depend upon small fixed
incomes.

Fair Distribution
The objects of the price and subsidy policy may be summed up as
a substantial effort not only to stabilize the cost-of-living index but
at the same time, in conjunction with measures of rationing and con-
trol of distribution, to secure adequate supplies of essential articles
to all sections of the community. It may, I think, be fairly said that,
in the result to-day, not only has the war-time distribution of the
available goods and service's worked fairly and with little or no
likelihood of hardship, but the foundation has been laid for an im-
proved nutritional standard for the nation as a whole, especially
when account is taken of the special schemes, such as the national
milk scheme and the vitamins scheme run by my right hon. Friend
the Minister of Food with such success. Certainly it can be said that
the whole policy has, in its achievement, marked a great improvement
over the course of events during the last war, when after three and
a half years of war the cost-of-living index was nearly 90 per cent.
above the pre-war figure as compared with a rise of only 28 per cent.
between September, 1939, and March, 1943, while for the same period
in the last great war food prices rose by 108 per cent., as compared
with 20 per cent. in this war.

Wages Policy
I must again point out that the stabilization policy and the wages
policy set out in 'the White Paper of July, 1941, are complementary.
The former is dependent on the latter and at the same time renders
it possible. The stabilization policy has obviated the necessity of
increases in wages where automatic adjustments are linked to the
cost-of-living figure. Since September, 1939, the average increase in
wage rates has been rather more than the increase in retail prices
shown by the cost-of-living index. The average increase in weekly







earnings has, of course, been much greater on account of greater out-
put and longer hours. On any calculation of the prices of necessaries
the rise in the cost of living is far below the net increase in earnings.
It is my duty to say again that this valuable but costly stabilization
policy depends upon the wise use of our machinery for wage nego-
tiations. There is still need for vigilance. Increases in wages, properly
and fairly justifiable as they may be, do not make more goods avail-
able nor do they increase the general standard of living, and they
may make it more difficult to secure a fair distribution of the limited
supply of goods. But this also should be said, that while no system can
give perfect results, our wages policy has also been successful in
two important matters. It has helped to maintain the sense of respon-
sibility and self-government which has characterized our industrial
system for so many years. It has also done much to foster that indus-
trial peace which has played such an important part in our war
effort..



RALPH ASSHETON
Financial Secretary to the Treasury
House of Commons, April 13, 1943
[Extract]
I would like to tell the Committee (of the House) how it struck
me when I first moved from the Ministry of Supply to the Treasury.
-I came from a Department which spends an enormous amount of
money; in fact, the Ministry of Supply alone spends in a year more
than the total amount of money which is collected in Income Tax, a
very startling fact when the revenue from Income Tax is over
1,000,000,000 a year. It was always a mystery to me to know how
this money was found, and everybody admits that the Chancellor
has been extraordinarily successful in finding it. Since I have been
at the Treasury, I have taken some trouble to try to inform myself
how this money is raised.

$32,000,000 a Day from Taxation
The total amount which is to be raised in the coming year is
something like 16,000,000 a day, if one takes into account not only
expenditure on the war but the expenditure on other items. Of this
sum of near 16,000,000 a day, nearly 8,000,000 is borrowed, and
8,000,000 is raised from taxes. Let me take first, the 8.000,000
which comes from taxes. Of that, 3,500,000 comes from Income Tax
and Surtax, 1,333,000 comes from Excess Profits Tax and National
Defence contributions and 250,000 from Death Duties. What else
is there to come out of taxation? The smokers are to find more than
1,000,000 a day. Those among us who consume liquor will contribute
nearly 750,000 a day. The Purchase Tax will contribute 2f50,000 a
day, and other taxes, such as entertainments and taxes on matches
and motor vehicles, and all those things, amount to something like
500,000 a day. That, of course, is taxation at unprecedentedly high
levels and even then we are raising only half of what we are spending.







$32,000,000 a Day Is Borrowed
Let us, therefore, look for a moment at the other 8,000,000 which
we borrow and see how that is borrowed. First, there is the item
which is described in the White Paper by the rather ugly and un-
pleasing term of "Overseas disinvestment," a term which I am sure
would have revolted our Victorian ancestors. The term was originally
coined to refer to the process of raising funds by selling foreign in-
vestments, but it also covers now the increase of our indebtedness to
overseas, and during the coming year it is estimated that this will
amount to 1,750,000 a day. The next important item is 1,250,000
a day which comes from borrowing the credit balances of official
funds, like the War Risks Insurance (Marine and Commodities) Fund,
and other funds which are called extra-Budgetary funds, and also
from borrowing surpluses accumulated by local authorities in their
sinking funds and so on. Then we come to a sum of 500,000 a day
which represents sums set aside by businesses for depreciation in so
far as those sums are not actually spent on replacements. Finally,
we have by far the biggest and most important item, 4,500,000,
which represents private savings and undistributed profits, including
reserves against taxation. That is a stupendous sum of money to
raise every day. . .



RT. HON. L. S. AMERY
Secretary of State for India
House of Commons, March 30, 1943
[Extracts]
Where, then, do we stand? Is there no conciliatory gesture, no
sympathetic initiative that might serve to break the deadlock, if not
with the Congress leaders, at any rate between other Indian parties?
I do not believe it is fair either to Lord Linlithgow, who has been
unwearied in endeavoring to bring the parties together or to those
parties themselves, even to the Congress Party, to suggest that the
deadlock is something which can be resolved by mere sympathetic
handling or by some happy expedient that may have been overlooked
in the framing of last year's Declaration. The differences are far
too deep and too sincerely held. Mr. Jinnah, on the one side, and the
Mahasabha leaders, on the other, to take the two extreme points of
view, are each contending for what they and millions behind them
believe to be vital principles between which, in their present mood
and in the situation as they see it, they can see no compromise. It
is no use blaming them. Let us rather see where the difference lies
and what has so intensely aggravated it in recent years.

Alternative Patterns of Democracy?
The Hindu majority of all parties-Congress, Liberals, Mahasabha
-are substantially agreed in one thing, in insisting upon the main-
tenance of the unity of India, at least for the most essential common
purposes. The Moslem attitude was clearly and unequivocally defined







by the Moslem League's secretary and spokesman in a recent debate
in the Assembly when he declared that
"The Moslems of India will never accept any form of central gov-
ernment which will place them at the mercy of the majority
community."
Are these two points of view really incompatible? They have not
proved incompatible so long as the ultimate control has rested with the
impartial authority of this House. Are they really and necessarily
incompatible under that democratic freedom which not only all
Indian parties but all parties in this House wish India to enjoy?
The conclusion to which J have been driven ever more definitely by
my contact with this problem over the last three years is that the
problem is not insoluble. But it cannot be solved unless we, and
still more Indians, can get away from the idea that there is only
one sealed pattern of democracy, namely, the particular form of Par-
liamentary Executive which we have developed in this country. I
believe with all my heart that ours is the best type of democracy in
the world, the most flexible and yet also the strongest and most stable.
But it can only exist in a relatively homogeneous country where free
discussion can convert the minority of to-day into the majority of to-
morrow, and where a strong tradition of national unity and Parlia-
mentary give-and-take transcend the exigencies of party passion and
the dictatorship of party organizations. Imposed as the central gov-
ernment of a Continent so deeply divided as India, that system would
only spell the tyranny of an immovable permanent majority or else,
in the alternative, disruption.
Would anyone dream of making our system the basis of a Federal
Government for Europe? Let me take Switzerland. With its three
separate races, Switzerland lives in happy unity under one of the
most democratic federal Constitutions in the world, but a Constitu-
tion under which no one race and no one party can secure control of
the Executive. I wonder whether even Switzerland could have hoped
under our system to have escaped the contagion of nationalist con-
flict outside her borders.
Fresh Constructive Solutions
Twenty-five years ago this House pledged itself to the progressive
attainment of responsible Government for India. We intended then,
and we intend it even more directly and immediately to-day, that
India should live under a Government responsible not to Parliament
here, but to her own people under her own Constitution. What how-
ever we too lightly assumed and what we led India to assume was
that this Government would necessarily be of our own particular type.
The nearer we have come to the fulfilment of our pledge the more
acute has become the internal deadlock in India. Experience of
responsible government in the Provinces as controlled by a totali-
tarian Hindu oligarchy enormously accentuated it. Our recent declara-
tions have only widened the breach. Yet I firmly believe there may
be more than one way round. Like wasps buzzing angrily up and
down against a window pane when an adjoining window may be
wide open, we are all held up, frustrated and irritated by the un-
realized and insuperable barrier of our constitutional prepossessions.
If only our mind, and above all the mind of India, could emerge from






the rut of our accustomed lines of thought and look for fresh con-
structive solutions, wherever they may be found, adapted to Indian
conditions, I am optimist enough to believe that the very way round
the present deadlock may be found, and perhaps found more rapidly
than now seems possible. It is for Indians themselves to find the way.
They alone can find a solution, for it is only when they have found it
for themselves that they will be minded to make it succeed.

Free Nations, Freely Associated
.We have no reason to be ashamed of our past record in India.
Never, if I may venture to echo certain great words used by the
Prime Minister in a different context, never have so few done so
much for the well-being of so many, so much to dispel fear and alle-
viate want, as was done for the toiling millions of India by a handful
of British administrators in the last century. The work was done,
it is true, within the limitations of the outlook of the age and local
conditions of the India of that time, but it was good and enduring
work for all that. It succeeded because those who did it believed in
their task and believed in themselves, and because we who sent them
out believed in ourselves and had faith in our mission in the world.
Because we believed in our mission, India believed in it, too, and
responded.
To-day we live in a very different age; we are dealing with a
very different India; our own outlook upon all these problems of
government and of racial relationships has undergone, and rightly
undergone, a profound change. Have we brought into that new age
the same faith or the same confident vision that inspired an earlier
generation? There was inspiration in the old vision, and no one can
deny it. How much more splendid, more inspiring, is the vision of a
Commonwealth of free nations, freely associated in equal partner-
ship, regardless of all differences of race or of creed, a partnership
not merely for mutual defence or mutual trade, but a partnership
and, what is more, a lead to the world in all good living, in all right
thinking, in all generous striving. If we have failed to inspire India
with that vision, if our response to Indian nationalism has looked to
Indians too much like a reluctant yielding to pressure, if our desire
to keep India within the Commonwealth has seemed to them a mere
instinctive hanging-on to some last indefinable shred of past author-
ity, may it not be due to the fact that we have not ourselves realized
sufficiently and vividly a vision of a united Commonwealth? How can
we expect the Indians to share that vision of a united Commonwealth
in all its range of opportunity, in all its breadth of freedom, if, I
hope I may be allowed to quote two lines of Francis Thompson:
"'Tis we, 'tis our estranged faces,
That miss the many-splendoured thing."
As for faith, surely what we do in this Island, what we, of this loosely
bound yet amazingly coherent Commonwealth, this youngest yet in-
finitely hopeful experiment in super-national co-operation, what we
have already shown to the world in the darkest hours of the present
struggle-surely that should give us faith in ourselves and in the ideals
and the possibilities of that Commonwealth in facing the tasks be-
fore us.






Of those tasks none can compare in importance to every member
of our Commonwealth, for the future peace of Asia and of the world,
with the solution, on a stable and enduring basis, of this great and
difficult problem of India. We cannot solve it by shirking our respon-
sibilities to the peoples of India, and of the Allied cause, while the
enemy is at India's gates. We can help to solve it only by our con-
tinuing good will to India, by our active interest in India, by our
encouragement of every effort that Indians may make to find their
own way out of their present deadlock; above all, it may be, by im-
parting to them some measure of our own faith in our common
future.



RT. HON. SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS
Minister for Aircraft Production
London, April 20, 1943
[Extracts]
The aeroplane of today is infinitely more complex than was its
predecessor even at the beginning of the war. Every fresh part that
is added to an aeroplane increases the complexity of the planning
problem of production.
There are today as much as 70,000 different pieces and shapes
of fabricated materials in a single aircraft and each one of these must
come forward punctually in its place, manufactured, tested and often
transported, if the production is not to be held up. 69,999 may all
be ready and waiting but if the 70,000th part is missing the aeroplane
cannot be completed.
That is for one type of aircraft, but there are a great many types
required-Trainers, Fighters, Reconnaissance, Naval, Bombers, and
all the rest.
Not only is there this great complexity of parts for production
but there must also be an output of spares and new parts to maintain
the ever-expanding fleet of planes not only in this country but in
every part of the world.
To do this work and produce the parts and the planes nearly
15,000 separate firms are today working in every part of the country.
Then we must remember another most important fact. We have
relied and most properly relied in this war upon the quality of our
production rather than upon mere quantity alone.
This means constant changes to new types, and such a change
completely disorganizes production for many months in those units
where it takes place.
More than that existing types have to undergo constant modifica-
tion to improve their performance or to suit the changing require-
ments of war.
Planes for different climates and territories require all kinds of
adjustments if they are to give a good performance under the differ-
ent climatic conditions. What will do in the Arctic is no good in the
Tropics and vice-versa.
Each modification whether in the airframe, the engine, the arma-
ment, or the equipment means a disturbance of the production line-







new drawings, new machine tools sometimes and perhaps the render-
ing useless of parts already made. An uneconomic performance in
peace-time but absolutely essential in times of war . .
I mention these factors to show you that it is by no means a simple
thing to plan so vast and complex an industry ...

One-Third Increase Per Worker
It is very difficult to find any figure which will give you a general
measure of its efficiency but perhaps the best general measure is the
structure weight per worker employed. That is to say we take the
actual manufactured weight of all the complete aircraft made in a
given period and divide it by the number of people employed during
that period in the whole industry.
Now comparing March 1942 with March 1943 there has been an
overall increase of over one-third-in fact 36%-in weight produced
per person employed.
That is a very remarkable record of increased efficiency through-
out the industry and it is largely because of that greatly increased
efficiency that we have been able to increase our production so sig-
nificantly.
I cannot of course give you any figures of what our output is but
I can give you an indication of its progress, and remember that one
aeroplane today is much more complicated and therefore more labor-
absorbing than one aircraft in 1941 or even 1942.
But here are two figures in structure weight again, as it is no
good comparing big bombers with small trainers.
In the first quarter of this year the total output of completed air-
craft in structure weight was half as much again-in fact 55% more
-than last year in the same quarter.

Bomber Output- Three and a Half Times as Great
The Heavy Bomber output was even better; taking that on the
same basis it was 31/2 times as much in the first quarter of 1943 as
in the first quarter of last year.
That will give you some idea of how we are still expanding our
output. Our planned programmewill continue increasingright through-
out the year, but there is a limit to the labor and the raw materials
available. These are not only required for new production.
The more we produce the more there is to maintain and to repair.
Today, apart from the minoi repairs done by the Royal Air Force
or repairs done overseas, we in M.A.P. are repairing monthly in this
country a number of planes equivalent to about 2/ of the monthly
output, and a number of engines of the same order.
Actually our output of spares with which to supply the Royal Air
Force here and overseas and our own repair centres is equivalent in
volume of output in some types to as much as half the monthly output
of planes. That is to say that if of a certain type of fighter say we
were to turn out 100 in a given period we should be turning out in
the same period the equivalent of another 50 in the form of spares.
So the limit will come when no more labor or materials are there
to supply the essential spares, do the necessary repairs and in addi-
tion to increase our output of finished planes.







LORD GREENE
Master of the Rolls: Chairman of the Board of Investigation
for the Coal Mining Industry
Broadcast, April 2, 1943
National Conciliation Scheme for Coal Mining Industry
On the 1st May something very important is going to happen in
one of our greatest industries. On that day a National Conciliation
Scheme for the Coal-Mining Industry of Great Britain will come into
force. For the first time in its history the industry will have perma-
nent, comprehensive and effective machinery for the settlement of
all major questions. I have had the honor to preside over the Board
of Investigation set up by the Government for the purpose of devising
such a scheme. We have worked for many months in close contact
with the leaders of both sides of the industry. They have co-operated
to give us every help and we are greatly indebted to them. The Scheme
which my Board has formulated has received the unanimous approval
of the National and District Associations of employers and work-
people in the industry throughout the whole country. This unanimity
we regard as the highest praise which our efforts could receive. It
means that the Scheme is recognized on all sides to be fair and work-
able. It means that the whole industry welcomes it and intends to
make it a success. It means that both sides of the industry have come
together and are resolved to co-operate in meeting their difficulties.
The industry has had a fairly stormy past. One period in its his-
tory may well be recalled at the present time, the period following
the last war and ending with the national coal strike of 1926 which
many of you will remember. When Government control came to an
end, the industry was faced during the post-war years with questions
of the greatest difficulty. No national machinery existed for dealing
with those questions. There was no body in existence which could
decide whether or not a national agreement should be made or what
its terms should be. At the time of the strike and ever since, the
workers have advocated the principle of a national conciliation
scheme. That principle has now been established and put into prac-
tical form. It is one of the greatest steps forward that the industry
has made.
Now contrast what happened in those years with what will happen
after this war. Many important questions are bound to arise. The
industry will have to adapt itself to new and difficult conditions.
There will be problems calling for patient examination, a deep sense
of responsibility and the highest statesmanship. The new machinery
will enable all these matters to be dealt with and decided, not by the
primitive and disastrous methods of strike or lockout, but by nego-
tiation and final decision in a way approved by the whole industry.
Wages and Conditions of Labor
Now for the Scheme itself. In the industry, wages and conditions
of labor must be settled at three different stages-nationally, in the
district and at the pit. Broad principles of general application must
be dealt with nationally; subject to this, agreements are made on a
district basis; detailed arrangements for individual collieries are
made at the pit. It follows that questions requiring settlement may







be pit questions, district questions or national questions. A satisfac-
tory scheme must therefore ensure that each class of question shall
be dealt with at the appropriate stage. The tradition of local and
district autonomy is strong in the industry. This is due partly to a
local sense of solidarity, partly to the widely different conditions
which prevail, not only as between district and district, but also as
between one pit and another in the same district. Most pit questions
are best settled at the pit; most district questions are best settled in the
district; national questions must be settled nationally. Accordingly,
there must be three sets of machinery, one for pit questions, one for
district questions and one for national questions. But if we stopped
there, the problem would be only half solved. A pit question does
not necessarily remain a pit question; it may be of sufficient im-
portance to become a district or even a national question. Similarly,
a district question may assume greater importance and so require
treatment as a national question. There must be means for trans-
ferring pit questions to the district and, if necessary, to the national
machinery and district questions to the national machinery in suit-
able cases.
You will see that our problem was not easy. We decided to tackle
it from the national end. We started by setting up a National Board
to deal with national questions. We then went on to lay down the
principles on which a district question is to be transferred from dis-
trict conciliation machinery to the National Board. So far, so good.
But the existing district concilation machinery is in many cases un-
satisfactory: in some districts no permanent machinery exists. Ac-
cordingly, we have provided that every district is at once to set up
proper conciliation machinery to deal with district questions and we
have laid down certain essential provisions which such machinery
shall contain. We have prepared a model form of a district concilia-
tion agreement which can be adapted to meet the special circum-
stances of individual districts, provided, of course, that the essential
provisions are not altered. There is no reason why the majority, if
not all, of the districts should not have their conciliation agreements
drawn up and signed before the first of May when the National
Scheme comes into force. My colleagues and I will be only too happy
to help in solving any difficulties which may arise in settling the form
of these agreements. As soon as these agreements have been made,
there will be complete machinery for dealing with all district ques-
tions and all national questions and for the transfer in proper cases
of district questions to the National Board.
We have not attempted to set up machinery for dealing with pit
questions at the pit. This is a matter which the industry itself must
take in hand. Every association, both of employers and workers, is
agreed on the necessity of overhauling and improving the existing
machinery for dealing with pit disputes and for providing for their
transfer to the district conciliation machinery when this becomes
desirable. They bind themselves by a clause in the Scheme to take
this matter in hand without delay. Here again our services are at
the disposal of the industry.

Representatives on the National Board
The National Board will consist of two parts, a Negotiating Com-
mittee consisting of an equal number of representatives of the two







national bodies and a National Tribunal to whom questions will be
referred for final decision if the Negotiating Committee fails to reach
a settlement within a reasonable time. The National Tribunal will
consist of three members appointed for five years. They will have
no connection with the industry and so will be completely impartial.
The two national bodies have been good enough to ask me to make
the appointments and I shall do my best with their help to find the
right men for the job.
May I conclude with a few words to those engaged in the industry,
employers and workers alike. My colleagues and I have worked hard
to give you the best machine that can be made. If you drive it well
it will confer great benefits upon you. Drive it carefully over the
rough places and round the corners. Like most machines, it will
break down if it is badly treated or if anyone throws a spanner into
the works. To the workers I venture to say: You have wanted such
a machine for many years-you have now got it. Make good use of
it. To the employers let me say: The problems which lie ahead will
be insoluble save by the joint action of both sides. Here is a machine
by which such joint action can be secured in a fair and statesmanlike
way. Make good use of it. To both sides I would say: This machine
is yours. Its success will depend upon the measure of goodwill, pa-
tience and co-operation that you bring to the working of it. Our task
is over; yours will now begin. Good luck.


RT. HON. OLIVER LYTTELTON
Minister of Production
Institution of Chemical Engineers, London, April 2, 1943
[Extracts]
S. I cannot possibly address an Institution of this kind without
paying a general tribute to the work which is being done by scientists
in the war. On this subject I must refer to the Prime Minister.
I say with the greatest sincerity and earnestness which I can
command, that when the history of the war comes to be written, one
of his greatest contributions to victory will turn out to be continual
help and the continual pressure which he has given and applied in the
field of scientific research and the practical adaption of scientific
discovery to the waging of war. You will remember that when I say it
I am talking about the statesman to whose credit stands the resistance
at the time of Dunkirk, the resurgence of British arms, and the
statesman who now counts amongst his achievements the closest co-
operation with the United States of America and with Russia.
Achievements of the "Industrial Army"
The war has done remarkable things to quicken development and
increase productive capacity in all the many industries that go to
produce munitions. The immense efforts of our industrial army have,
I think, even now not been fully realized and appreciated.
By the fourth quarter of 1942 the rate of output of warlike stores
produced for the Ministry of Supply-weapons and ammunition,
tanks and other military stores-was double .that of the average rate
in 1941.







In the last quarter of 1942 the structure weight (which is the
only true comparison) of our production of aircraft was just about
75% higher than the average quarterly production of 1941.
Despite the increasing difficulties rising from the further demands
of the Services for man-power from the factories, and the always
present necessity to conserve raw materials in order to save shipping
space for military use, the increase is being continued into the present
year. Our output of munitions of all sorts in February of this year
was just about 40% greater than that of last February and it still
continues to expand, even though the rate will necessarily be some-
what slower than in the earlier days of rapidly developing pro-
grammes.
To give you only one example, you will be interested to know that
we produced in February more than four times the number of heavy
bombers than we did a year ago.
This increased ouput has been largely achieved by three things:
developments by Scientists and Industrial Engineers; increased effi-
ciency of labor; and increased efficiency of management. That output
is a magnificent testimony to everybody engaged in industry, to the
Scientists and Engineers for their new discoveries and improvements
in the planning, co-ordination and supervision of production.
War, by sucking up labor and materials, has already taught us to
achieve economies of production that we should have regarded as
impossible in peace-time; and during this year we have to learn to
make even more drastic economies of both.
We have learned this largely by the exchange of knowledge. With-
in this country we have sought to share the experience of different
producers. We have shared our knowledge also with our allies. We
spent something in the order of one hundred million pounds in the
construction of new factories or expansions of existing factories in
U. S. A. and Canada, and we have sent out our technical engineers to
assist in getting these factories going. Taking chemical and explosives
plants alone, we have spent 28 million pounds in the erection of new
plants or expansions to existing ones in U. S. A. and Canada.

Mercurial Demands of War
I want also to say something about production, programming, or
scheduling as it is called in America. I hope everybody will realize
how much more mercurial the demand for our products is in war
than it is in peace-time. The business man has many mercurial fac-
tors with which to deal; things change, bad harvests reduce the pur-
chasing power of primary producers, production from new industrial
countries competes in his export markets, new products sometimes
reduce and sometimes increase the demand for the old.
The modern business man, faced by a demand large enough and
long enough can solve the other problems of production with com-
parative ease. Now pne might have thought, at first blush, that since
the greater part of all our production is now upon Government ac-
count the nature of the demand would obviously be far less mercurial
than it is in peace-time, since we have now, generally speaking, one
customer with almost unlimited credit to whom we have to look.
But actually the contrary is true.
First of all, strategy, a word, by the way, which is becoming much







abused as it becomes more current, strategy will determine wmcn
countries are going to become theatres of war, and as we change from
one to another a very marked change in the nature of our weapons
is imposed upon us. It does not, of course, apply over the whole range
of weapons, but it applies to specific instances. On this matter we
have to estimate and use our imagination. The obvious instance that
occurs to me this afternoon is that of the tank.

The End of Desert Fighting
It may, I think, be said without much danger that the days of
desert warfare are numbered and that we must look forward in
future to fighting in enclosed country, country with roads and rivers
and railways, and here again, when we apply our imagination to the
subject of tanks, I think that we are quite right to pay great attention
to the manufacture of well armoured and easily manoeuverable tanks
with great "punch" at short ranges.
Possibly a word about some of the actual tanks in use in Tunisia
might not be out of place. It is notable that one of the best tanks
possessed by either side is now the A.22 which is, of course, our old
friend the Churchill. I see no point in having attached that name to
the tank during its teething troubles and, now that it has been proved
in battle a reliable weapon of war and when the troops have the ut-
most confidence in it, I see no point in giving it one of those dreary
abstract labels like "A.22".
We have had messages from General Alexander, and others, pay-
ing tribute to its fighting qualities. Recently in North Africa a long
approach march was made by these tanks without serious mechanical
trouble of any sort. They took severe punishment from artillery of all
calibres and remained in action, and one tank which had several of
the bogies blown off was still a runner when the dust of the enemy
was seen retreating from the battlefield.
I am not going, naturally, into what our future programme is,
but I am only trying to show that we have to throw our minds into
the future to see what sort of weapons will be appropriate to a type
of war which has not yet begun.
Again, the tactics which govern the use of weapons are subject to
just as wide changes as those imposed by changing strategy. This
applies in all three Services and unfortunately it does not only apply
to the changes in tactics adopted by our own admirals, generals and
air marshals, it applies to changes in tactics adopted by our enemies.
Let me give you an example from the Sea. The U-Boat has been
driven further out into the Atlantic; the U-Boats now hunt in packs
and are developing different systems of attack. All these have to be
countered by new methods which now lead to new weapons.
Again, to pass to a more obvious aspect of the subject, the de-
mand for weapons comes about in two distinct phases. The first is
when a belligerent nation is building up its stocks for attack. The
moment that has been done- and the capital stock is full it should
reduce its programme so that it has only to supply our wastage or
expenditure rate.
Of course, that wastage and expenditure rate is constantly changed
by both the strategy, the tactics and the nature of the war.
We thus find that in trying to plan our production, there are an







immensely greater number of variables upon which one has to exercise
imagination and foresight and an immensely larger number of sub-
jects upon which it is possible to make mistakes compared with those
which face a man selling a well-known product in the commercial
markets of the world however confusing they may be.

Secret Weapons
In this country we are "Batch-minded". We have not got a large
enough market around our factories to give us the opportunity for
universal mass-production, such as can be applied in a vast market
like the United States. The nature of our peacetime trade does not
allow -us to adopt continuous line production since the proportion
of our national economy which depends upon export is so much greater
than that of a great continent like that of the United States. Con-
sequently, our manufacturers have designed their plants with a great
degree of flexibility. They have attempted to go in for general pur-
pose tools and smaller sized units. This has great advantages and also
disadvantages in war.
It is an advantage that we are enabled to switch from one type
of weapon or from one modification to another with less dislocation
than a country that is organized and tooled for a great mass produc-
tion.
But, on the other hand, we find that as we have to dilute our
skilled labor forces, as we have done with great success, and as we
bring into the factories large numbers of men and women and more
particularly women, who have never been in factories before, it is
necessary to break the job down into smaller operations and for these
operations specialized tools become necessary. But I think on the
whole the advantages of flexibility outweigh the disadvantages and
it is the constant endeavor of a Minister of Production and of the
War Cabinet to use this flexibility to the best advantage and to try
and develop new weapons ahead of the enemy.
I think we may claim that thanks to the great fertility of our
scientists we are in a fair way of achieving this object.
Let me say in general, that about 33% of our production now
at this moment is engaged upon turning out weapons which did not
exist, except in the imagination of their inventors, when the war
broke out, and others are coming on and are being developed all the
time. These are our secret weapons.

When Peace Comes
I have to speak in very general terms about our scientific achieve-
ments in munitions of war, but I do not think that they are any less
in such fields as those of nutrition, of plastics, substitutes of all kinds,
and in medical research designed to maintain not only the health of
our civil population, but also to protect our fighting forces so far as
is possible from the many diseases which are likely to assail them in
the diverse theatres of war.
Let us look for a moment beyond the present and into the future.
When peace comes, we shall be confronted with the problem of turn-
ing over to peacetime uses all our vastly increased capacity to pro-
duce. And here let us take a lesson from the last war. Until the clock
struck eleven on November 11th, 1918, there was scarcely any task







too great for the Ministry of Munitions to tackle. A million new
houses, the complete re-equipping of an obsolescent industry, the uni-
versal provision of cheap transport was then, as now, a task which
would have been programmed, contracted and pushed rapidly through
to completion. After the clock had struck eleven a curious lethargy
seemed to fall upon us all, and tasks which should have occupied
months came to occupy years.
This time it is essential that we shall tackle our peacetime prob-
lems with ail tne energy that we have developed during the war. . .
This country has always been in the forefront of fundamental
scientific research, and there is every reason to hope that we can
retain this supremacy. But the application of the results of that re-
search to practical needs has sometimes, in the past, been left to the
technicians of other nations, so that we have not reaped the full
benefit of our own fundamental discoveries. It is here that the chem-
ical engineer must increasingly play his part, in peace as in war,
by creating from the discoveries of the chemical research labora-
tories new and effective processes based on materials that are eco-
nomically available to us.
Our own industrial greatness has been built on coal; and coal
will have to remain the principal basis of our chemical industries.
But the war has brought the nations of the British Commonwealth
into closer contact, and the unity of effort which has resulted must
be continued in time of peace for our common prosperity and com-
fort. To the Dominions and Colonies we can look for raw materials
of many other kinds.
The resources and possibilities of many of them are as yet only
imperfectly realized.
If the great potentialities of our chemical industry are to be
fully realized we must have vigorous planning of all its aspects both
technical and economic. Its adaption to the problems of peace must
have an important place in our four-year plan. This planning must be
on a national scale, but it must leave ample room for the development
of the initiative of the individual enterprise. If we are to achieve our
objectives, industry must be prepared to co-operate without reserve,
and to foster a closer relationship with the Universities and with
the Government Research organizations.


RT. HON. SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS
Minister for.Aircraft Production
National Conference of Youth Organizers, Bristol, April 17, 1943
[Extracts]
When the war is over, and the Axis powers have been finally
defeated, then the four most powerful nations in the world will be
U. S. A., U. S. S. R., China and the British Commonwealth of Nations,
and upon those four in association with the United Nations will fall
the main task of rehabilitation. That task must be projected forward
into a world organization in which all the United Nations will play
their part. It has now come to be recognized that in such a world
organization, if it is to have the power to assist the orderly and








peaceful progress of humanity, there must be certain capacities for
action.
It must be able to give a majority decision as to what is right and
wrong internationally.

Post-War International Organization
It must be able to back up that decision by some international
authority which can compel compliance or can punish those who
will not comply.
It must be able to delegate to smaller regional bodies-such for
instance as a European Council-those matters of purely regional
concern.
Thus we begin to see emerging a body which though based on the
concept of a League of Nations must be very different in its powers
and its range of subjects than was the League after the last war.
But within this larger organization there is a movement to knit
together the smaller countries in federal units of some kind, so that
they may tle better be able to preserve their independence in the
face of large and powerful neighbors. The old concept of the small
client state bid for by one great power or another is passing away in
favor of groups of small states with a common foreign policy and a
common means of defence.
So we have a structure based as it should be on the maintenance
of the individual culture of the various nations, but binding them
together in ever wider groups, the confederation, the regional coun-
cil and the world authority; at each stage some degree of co-ordina-
tion taking place and so some elements of friction and hostility
avoided. But with this a supreme world policing authority basing its
power upon the consent of its constituents and upon a system of rec-
ognized international morality and justice.
Into this picture will fit the four greater powers who will in the
initial years of organization have to make great contributions to main-
tain the stability of the structure and to prevent a recurrence of
aggressive action such as that which precipitated the present and
the last war.
We have to hand after this war a quickly-striking and effective
police force in the form of air power, a power that must be denied
to the Axis powers until they can enter once again with safety into the
comity of Nations.
Much thought is being given, too, to the problem of civil aviation,
with the object of removing its possible future danger to the world
and its development for that great service which it can be to man-
kind.
The hopes of some such effective world organization must depend
in the first instance upon the ability of the four greater powers, the
British Commonwealth, the U. S. A., the U. S. S. R. and China, to
come to an agreement amongst themselves-not an agreement to
impose any domination on the world but an agreement to render all
the assistance that they can to the working out of such a scheme by
the United Nations. .
Over and above every piece of learning they are taught we must
educate our youth to the glory of their adventure in life and to the
part which they must play if we are to make our democracy that vital







living power which can keep us as strong in peace as it has made us
strong in war.
Never in the history of the world have opportunities been so great,
not opportunities of personal advancement, but the chance to make
great contributions to the happiness and prosperity of our country
and so of the world.



RT. HON. ERNEST BROWN
Minister of Health
Opening a Maternity and Child Welfare Centre at Watford,
March 26, 1943

National Health: A New Chapter
The completion of this fine modern maternity and child welfare
centre is a great event in the story of the maternity and child welfare
service in Watford. An old chapter is closed, a new one begins; you
are on the threshold of new achievement. For some years the welfare
work has been handicapped by the circumstances in which it has
had to be carried on, in premises too old, too small, and quite un-
worthy of your Borough. The added strains and stresses of war-
time have thrown an intolerable burden on the old centre, and the
quarters which have long been cramped have become grossly inade-
quate. The war has, in fact, intensified your problems; it has lent a
new urgency to the task of solving them; and also, by giving rise to
building difficulties, and by creating preoccupations connected with
the winning of the war itself, the war has rendered it less easy to
find a solution. But you have not been deterred by difficulties. You
have not allowed the claims of war work to prevent planning and
creating for peace. And today this centre stands as a memorial of
your determination in the future to have a maternity and child wel-
fare service which shall be second to none.
There is a very real sense in which the story of your new centre
is being enacted on an ampler stage. You will remember that the
Prime Minister in his broadcast on Sunday said: "We must establish
on broad and solid foundations a National Health Service."
As a community we stand now in relation to our health services
as a whole in much the same position as you stand in relation to your
maternity and child welfare work. Over the years we have built up,
bit by bit, a whole range of excellent services-and they are excellent.
I should like to emphasize this point. We have nothing to be ashamed
of. Britain's health record and fund of professional skill will bear
comparison with those of any other country in the world. But the
building we have made for ourselves is cramped, badly designed, and
getting out of date. It is an unsatisfactory patchwork, as buildings
so often are that have been put up piecemeal at different dates. It
is generally agreed that the time has come for us to erect a new build-
ing-and the war has introduced a note of urgency-a building
planned in accordance with the best modern developments and incor-
porating the best materials that are available. This building I would







describe as a national health service; and I should like to speak for a
few moments of what a national health service involves.
As you will all know, the Government announced in connection
with the recent debates in Parliament on the Beveridge Report that
they intend to press on with the preparation of a comprehensive
health service. This is a task which falls to the Secretary of State for
Scotland and to myself, and I am very conscious of the magnitude of
the undertaking. The Government has in fact charged us, in con-
sultation with all those who will be playing a part in the service, with
framing plans for a social reform whose scope and importance it is
scarcely possible to exaggerate. It, is a reform which will touch the
life of almost every member of the community, and which can eventu-
ally contribute more to human welfare and human happiness, and
to the strength of the British nation, than any of the historic social
advances of the past century. The task is nothing less than to ensure
to every man, woman and child in this country the advantages of a
complete up-to-date health service provided through the general prac-
titioner, the consultant, and the hospital, and through every other
related branch of health work.
The field which the Government have to survey is the whole of
what the Prime Minister called "the spacious domain of public health."
Discussions with the representatives of local government, the medical
profession, and the voluntary hospitals, have already started. We
are seeking all possible help and guidance from those who will be
intimately concerned with the working of the National Health Service.
The present discussions are confidential; and until they have reached
a more advanced stage, no public pronouncements are possible. Later,
it is our intention to put before the country a general statement of
the plans which the Government has in mind to submit to Parliament.
The general public and the medical profession-including the doctors
who are serving in the Forces-will therefore have ample opportunity
for consideration of the proposals.
Even though detailed statements at present would be out of place, it
is not, however, premature to suggest certain broad principles which
should guide us in our consideration of the form which a national
health service should take. In the forefront I would place the prin-
ciple of first-class services for all. We cannot as a community afford
to have second or third-class services for anybody. By this I mean
that every man, woman and child must be able to call in to their aid
the best services that modern science can provide, and that every
doctor and health worker must have at their disposal the best facilities
for full diagnosis and proper treatment. This has by no means been
the position everywhere in the past.

Group Medical Practice
As an example of the kind of improvement which could be made
I would mention the possibilities of group practice, which is a con-
ception underlying most current thought on the work of the family
doctor. Group practice is the development of the well-established
tendency of general practitioners to join together in partnerships of
three and four or more, in which each member is strengthened in his
work by the experience and help of the others. The conception is that
the group should work together in a well-equipped clinic-often re-
ferred to as a "health centre"-where modern aids to diagnosis and






proper nursing and clerical staff would be provided, and where other
branches of the health service would also be based. A reform of this
kind could confer the greatest possible benefits both on the patient
and on the family doctor; for the patient it could secure a full and
co-ordinated service of a quality which is often quite unattainable at
the present time; and for the doctor it could ensure conditions of
work in which his professional skill could have full play.
I have referred specially to this plan of group practice from health
centres because it is so closely akin to the conception underlying a
welfare centre like this one. But it is only one of the conclusions
which force themselves upon our minds when we adopt the principle
of first-class services for all. Others will readily occur to you, such
as the more even distribution of consultant and hospital services.
The second conclusion to which I would draw attention to-day
falls, however, within a different category-that of administration.
First-class services for all depend on first-class planning and execu-
tion. We shall not get first-class services if they are everybody's busi-
ness and nobody's responsibility. We must commit to capable hands
the duty of providing these services, by drawing together into a com-
prehensive whole the sometimes scattered and unrelated resources we
already have, and by developing them wisely and well. The Govern-
ment looks confidently to local government, with its long experience
and its resilience in meeting the problems both of war and peace, to
undertake this new responsibility. The imposition of this additional
task may involve adjustments of the local government machine; for
example, we cannot build up first-class services on too narrow a foun-
dation. The shoulders on which the burden is to be placed must be
broad enough to sustain it; the units of organization must be large
enough to allow scope for efficient planning and effective execution.
At the same time we must do all we can to preserve that local initia-
tive and local enthusiasm-whether displayed in voluntary work or
in local government service-which have served us in such good stead
in the past. These are in fact two of the main problems under con-
fidential discussion at the moment-first, to see how the two great
streams of voluntary and municipal effort can best be brought to-
gether in common effort for the common good; and second, to dis-
cover the best method of securing the advantage of big scale and of
small scale organization.

Personal and Professional Freedom
Another great principle which our national health service must
embody is that of personal and professional freedom. Let me explain
what I have in mind. Some people are afraid of an organized na-
tional health service, because they think it will inevitably be a soul-
less bureaucratic machine, by which patients will be dragooned into
health and doctors dragooned into mediocrity and servility. If I be-
lieved that a service conceived in these terms was anything but an
unreal bogey, I should myself be the first to condemn it, and I should
shrink from the task of preparing for it. But I do not believe that
an organized service must inevitably involve loss of personal or pro-
fessional freedom. Health is an intensely personal matter, and any
national health service must be an intensely personal service. The
family doctor, chosen by the family as their doctor, as the doctor in
whom they have confidence and whom they often hold in real affection







-this ideal must be the foundation stone of our service, and I am
sure that it can be. Our plans and discussions must be at all times
directed to reconciling the intimate personal relationship between the
family and the doctor with the conception of group practice of which
I spoke a moment ago.
So much for the first half of the principle, personal freedom; let
us turn to the second half, professional freedom. There is a very real,
and a very intelligible fear among some members of the medical pro-
fession that an organized national health service will bring with it
strict control of the day-to-day professional work of the practitioner,
the rule of forms and routine, the end of initiative and professional
independence. Here again I fully appreciate the danger; but it seems
to me a danger that can be avoided, and not a defect inherent in every
kind of national service. Indeed I would go so far as to suggest that
the medical services can be so organized as to confer on the average
practitioner a freedom to exercise his professional talents in a meas-
ure enjoyed at the present time only by a fortunate minority. I have
already mentioned the example of organized group practice, which
can become a charter of liberty for the overworked doctor. As a mem-
ber of a team of colleagues, and with the assistance given by the other
staff of a health centre, the practitioner ought to be able to look for-
ward to conditions of service worthy of a great profession, with full
scope for the exercise of his skill and with ample opportunity for
keeping in touch with advances in medicine.
This is one form which professional freedom must take; another, on
which I can only touch, is freedom to have a voice in the organization
of the health service. One of our tasks is to make sure that the ex-
pert's views are given their full weight both in planning and execu-
tion. Local democracy must clearly bear the direct responsibility for
the provision of the service, but it must be a local government in-
formed and strengthened by the advice of the medical expert. This
again is one of the main problems under confidential discussion-
how best to secure the proper place for professional opinion in the
administration of a national service.

A Creative Health Service
One other building principle I must emphasize; and I mention it
last not because it is the least important, but because in a sense it
summarizes the whole purpose of the national health service we are
seeking to create. It is the principle of the positive promotion of
health. We all know the platitude that prevention is better than cure;
and like most platitudes, it is acknowledged as true in theory and
largely forgotten in practice. A great many of the advances in social
life are due to the rediscovery of platitudes. That is what has been
happening with this one. For some years now there has been increas-
ing interest in and discussion of the problems of social medicine. We
are told that we need what has been called positive health, or that
we must keep fit. Attention has been focused on problems of en-
vironment and nutrition and their influence on healthy living, and
there has been a rapid development in the scope and activity of pre-
ventive medicine. The phrases used may vary, but the underlying
idea is the same-that it is not enough to organize the treatment of
sickness when it has arisen; the causes of ill health must be tracked
down and removed, and individual fitness must be promoted and







maintained. A health service which concentrated on the diagnosis
and treatment of sick persons would be no health service at all; it
would be a negative thing, a sickness service concerned only with run-
ning repairs, instead of a positive, creative force. Our national ser-
vice must be positive, it must be informed and inspired with the spirit
of creative health which is embodied in this Welfare Centre. Ma-
ternity and Child Welfare work, of which this Centre is the focus in
this town, is a positive service, designed to prevent rather than to
cure, organized to help mothers and children and to guide their feet
in the ways of healthy living, and not merely to provide first-aid
when they have wandered from the path and fallen into the ditch.
The scope of our new national health service will be much wider and
more far-reaching than that of maternity and child welfare; but it
will fail-and we shall have failed in our planning-if in gaining in
the breadth of our vision we lose in depth. This principle of the
promotion of healthy living, which has for so long guided the devel-
opment of the Maternity and Child Welfare service with such success-
ful results, is not merely essential to success, it is the very essence of
the plans which the Government, with the assistance of all concerned,
are trying to make.



RT. HON. VISCOUNT CRANBORNE
Lord Privy Seal
House of Lords, March 23, 1943
[Extracts]
We live to-day at a time when we might almost have expected to
have become callous to horrors, but I do not think there can be any-
one, if he thinks at all, who is not appalled by the catalogue of horrors
which is retailed to us every day in the newspapers through their
correspondents in neutral countries, and which is supported by docu-
mentary photographs, so that there can be no doubt whatever of the
facts. [Previous speakers] have painted a vivid and moving picture
of the situation in Europe and of the odious persecutions which are
being inflicted upon the Jews, the Czechoslovaks, the Poles, the Yugo-
slavs and the other subject peoples. For I think it would be a mistake
to throw undue emphasis on the Jewish side of this question. We all
admit it is perhaps the most horrible feature, but it is only a feature
of a much bigger problem, and the problem must be faced as a
whole. . .
It is up to us, as to other nations, to do all in our power consistent
with military security considerations-and I would add with the vital
interests of our own people-to provide assistance and asylum for
the victims of this policy of extermination. That has been throughout
the policy of His Majesty's Government, and it remains their policy
to-day. The refugee problem is not one of those problems on which
there is any difference of view, so far as I know, as to the object which
is sought to be attained; on that we are all of us united. It is purely
a question of methods and means and practical possibilities. That is
the whole of the problem. It does not make it a small problem but
that is the whole nature of the problem. ..







Refugees in Britain
If I may take, first of all, this country, certainly I should have
thought it could not be said that Great Britain had been backward in
the taking in of refugees from Nazi oppression. Even before the war,
in accordance with our traditional policy towards the victims of per-
secution, we had admitted from Germany and Austria alone over
50,000 adults, and many of these had children with them. There was
also a further 13,000 children without adults. In addition nearly
10,000 Czechoslovak nationals found refuge here in the twelve months
which preceded the war. The refugee population of this country,
therefore, at the moment of the outbreak of war, was 78,000, not
counting children without parents. . .
Now I should like to examine the intake of refugees since the
start of the war. In 1940 we took in approximately 35,000-these
figures are inevitably somewhat approximate-in 1941, when the con-
ditions were much more difficult, we took in 13,000; and in 1942 we
took 15,000. . .
The figure does not include the members of the Allied Forces,
which are very considerable in this country. This makes a total of a
little over 60,000 refugees since the war. Adding the number of pre-
war refugees and war refugees, we get a total of over 150,000 souls,
all of whom have to be fed and cared for .. .

Palestine
Finally, I come to the case of Palestine. Here, we not only have an
economic but a political problem. As it has fallen to my lot to explain
again and again in this House, it is not possible for His Majesty's
Government to go beyond the terms of policy approved by Parlia-
ment. . What we can do, and what in my opinion we must do, in
the cause of humanity, is to go to the absolute limit that that policy
allows. . In the statement made on February 3 it was announced
that the Government of Palestine had agreed to admit from Bulgaria
4,000 Jewish children, with 500 adults accompanying them, as well as
500 children from Hungary and Rumania. In addition my right hon-
orable Friend (the Secretary of State for the Colonies) said, and I
quote his words:
"His Majesty's Government will be prepared, provided the
necessary transport facilities can be made available, to continue
to admit into Palestine Jewish children, with a proportion of
adults, up to the limits of immigration permissible for the five-year
immigration period ending 31st March, 1944. The numbers in-
Svolved are approximately 29,000, still available under the White
Paper. The usual conditions governing immigration would have
to be fulfilled. My right honorable friend will realize that the very
considerable difficulties involved in making the necessary arrange-
ments for transport "
I ask your Lordships to note those particular words-
"and for the accommodation and sustenance in Palestine of such
large parties of refugees, may limit the numbers that can be
handled under this procedure."
If there have been delays they arise from practical questions re-







lating to transport. His Majesty's Government are not at fault. It
is not a question of undue delay. It is because the transport is not
forthcoming. I was surprised to hear the most reverend Primate say
that three weeks have passed, and the transport is not available. Has
the most reverend Primate any idea of the transport situation at the
present time? Every ship is earmarked. Every ship is moving the
whole time. A ship has to be taken off a certain route in order to put
it on another route. The situation is not in the least normal, and I am
afraid I could not agree that three weeks is an unduly long time.
What I can say is that it is clearly right we should reduce the time to
the minimum, that every effort should be made to get these unhappy
little children to Palestine as soon as they can possibly be got there,
and I can give the House an absolute assurance that is what my right
honorable friend the Colonial Secretary is at present doing. I am
not going to say he will achieve these results immediately. I think it
very likely it will take some time. But he will do his utmost, and no-
body can do more . .
The capacity of Great Britain and of her Colonial territories to
maintain vast quantities of refugees is dependent, and must be de-
pendent in war-time, on two vital and inter-related considerations.
Those are shipping and food. Already our resources are greatly
stretched. I do not say no more refugees can be taken in; it would be
quite absurd to say that not a single other refugee can be taken into
this country or the Empire. I hope a good many more will be taken.
But I do say that Great Britain alone can find no solution to this ter-
rible problem, though of course they can, and I think must, use every
method they can to try to alleviate it .

An International Problem
The neutral countries in Europe are few and they are themselves
short of food, but in spite of their difficulties-and, I think it will be
generally agreed, to their eternal credit-they are maintaining at the
present time large numbers of refugees and more are constantly com-
ing in from the occupied territories. If we ask them to take greatly
increased numbers they are likely to require assurances that these
refugees will be rapidly removed to another country of refuge, and
immediately we shall come up against what is our main and our most
intractable difficulty. We have ourselves alone nowhere at the present
time to offer as a country of ultimate refuge for any substantial num-
ber of refugees. .
We are in fact at this moment admitting over 800 refugees a
month, who have escaped from the occupied territories and many of
whom are anxious to join in the common fight against the Germans
and other Axis Powers. There is, however, a certain point beyond
which, in this country, we cannot and will not go. The essential need
-and this is the only real hope of a cure for this difficult and tragic
situation-is to find somewhere where the refugees can be taken in
without creating those dangers which face us. . .
There is no doubt that it is only on an international basis that we
can handle this problem. After all, even before the war, it was recog-
nized that the refugee problem was an international responsibility.
The establishment by the League of Nations of the High Commis-
sioner for refugees, and the establishment by the generous initiative







of the American President, of the Evian Committee are witness of
that. If it was an international problem before the war, how much
more is it an international problem now! The first step which obvi-
ously had to be taken if we were to put this matter on an interna-
tional basis was to approach the United States of America. For the
United States, as noble Lords know, has shown the most whole-
hearted sympathy with this problem and has herself in recent years
taken a very large number of refugees. The first thing was to ask
for her collaboration.

Conference With United States
His Majesty's Government therefore, as your Lordships 'know,
made an approach to the United States in January last and sug-
gested an informal Conference. In reply, the United States Govern-
ment expressed themselves as sharing the concern of His Majesty's
Government with regard to this terrible problem and explained the
contribution which the United States administration and people had
already made towards a solution. In answer to the proposal for a
Conference, which was what I may call the executive proposal of the
British Government, they suggested action on the following basis. I
hesitate to state this at length to your Lordships, because many of
you already know the story in full; but I should like it to go on record.
First of all, they said that the refugee problem should not be con-
sidered as confined to any particular race or faith. With that I think
we shall all be in the very fullest agreement. Secondly, they said
that inter-Governmental collaboration should be sought for the accom-
modation of refugees as near as possible to the areas where they
were at present receiving hospitality. That is, of course, intended
to overcome the immense difficulties caused by the shortage of ship-
ping. Thirdly, they said that plans should therefore be made for the
maintenance of refugees in neutral countries in so far as there was
transport to get them there. This would involve assurance of support
and return to their native countries when the war ended. That is
rather on the lines of some of the things suggested this afternoon,
and, on an international basis where more shipping resources may be
available, it may very likely be a practicable proposition. Then there
was a suggestion in regard to the exploratory Conference. His Ma-
jesty's Government accepted the suggestion for Anglo-American ex-
ploratory consultation and they agreed to the basis for discussion
which I have just detailed to your Lordships. . .
I am in a position this afternoon to make a statement which has
been agreed between the two Governments and which only reached
this country this morning. This is the statement:
"Question 'of the plight of oppressed and persecuted persons
in Europe has been taken up between Mr. Hull and Mr. Eden. It
has been decided that conversations in connection with this matter
should take place in the immediate future.
"His Majesty's Government and the United States Government
have given expression to their deep interest in coming to a de-
cision as to practical steps which may be taken to supplement the
actual measures now being undertaken by the two Governments.
Particular reference has been made to persecuted peoples in East-
ern Europe for a number of whom refuge in Palestine has already







been offered, and to those in Western Europe for some of whom
actual arrangements for relief and evacuation have already been
made and further arrangements are under preparation.
"The two Governments have previously agreed by exchange of
Notes upon the necessity for urgent and immediate action and
have arrived at an agenda which they intend to implement in their
forthcoming conversations. This programme would have the full
support of His Majesty's Government and United States Govern-
ment and no doubt of other United Nations and neutrals whose
collaboration it is hoped to secure . "
There is no rapid or easy cure for this problem. Even before the
war, as I know personally, because I was concerned with the ques-
tion in Geneva and at League Committees in Paris and elsewhere,
the difficulties regarding a complete solution were almost insuperable.
To-day they are increased one hundredfold. All we can do and must
do, is to keep pegging away in the hope of doing something to alle-
viate the agony of these unhappy people. That has been throughout
-and I can assure your Lordships' House with all sincerity will con-
tinue to be-the policy of His Majesty's Government.



... Whether that last round is in sight I do not know, but I know
that you'll have to keep on working at this same pressure for some
years to come. Even when the war's won, there'll be a food shortage.
There are today countless thousands in the world who aren't getting
enough to eat. That's particularly true of those lands that Hitler is
robbing and starving. The moment he's defeated and they're free,
their desperate need will be like an enormous vacuum, sucking away
the food supplies of the rest of the world. For a time, at least, it'll
be difficult to keep our own people fed even as well as they've been
fed in war-time; and we may find ourselves even more dependent on
the food that you grow than we are today.
But even when that first frantic rush is over, the world's need for
a bigger food supply will go on, and increase. There are millions of
people in the more backward parts of the earth, who've never been
well fed. Anything we do-and I trust we shall do a great deal-to
raise their prosperity and standard of living, will at once mean that
they demand more and better food. There's a busy prospect for food
producers in the world we hope for.
[LORD WOOLTON, Minister of Food, broadcasting to the
British farmers, March 25, 1943.]









-g -495
















Other Material Available from the
British Information Services Includes:

Britain: a monthly magazine. 10 cents a copy or $1 a year.

Information Division Circular. A fortnightly bulletin of
current background news on Britain. Free on appli-
cation.

Labor and Industry in Britain. Monthly. Free on appli-
cation.
Information papers on wartime Britain covering Taxa-
tion, Education, Rationing, Women's Work, Industry,
etc., may be obtained free on application.

Also:
Britain Plans (Official Statements, 1941-1942).
Post-War Planning in Britain (Unofficial Planning).
50 Facts about Britain at War.
Another 50 Facts about Britain at War.
50 Facts about India.
50 Facts about Social Services in Britain.

(All available free on application.)

For catalogue of Films available, terms of hire, etc., apply
to any office of the British Information Services.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs