UNPOLITICAL TRUTHS
IF the glowing prospect of economic progress of which Sir Anthony Eden spoke in the first of the BBC's election broadcasts is to be realised, and the very tangible disasters which Mr. Maudling argues in this week's Spectator would follow from a failure in economic strategy, are to be avoided, it is essential that we should stop having continual strikes; yet strikes are a subject to which neither election manifesto Makes any reference. Apart from considerations of electioneering tact, the explanation of this is that there is absolutely nothing which either party could do by statute or decree to prevent strikes or to regulate wage claims. It has for long been the tragedy of democratic socialism, not only in this country but everywhere democratic socialism has been attempted, that it has been forced to pursue economic justice and stability by controlling every source of national wealth except the one which socialist theory holds to be the only true source of national wealth, that is to say, labour. It is not only that the British Labour Party depends politically on the trade unions and therefore cannot attack their privileges; it is also that both parties recognise that free trade unionism is now part of that fundamental constitution of society which it is neither the interest nor the business of political parties to touch, and which, indeed, they could not touch without endangering parliamentary democracy itself.
* * * same industry, or all those engaged in similar work in another industry, at least some wage claims will appear even to the most sanguine trade unions as beyond the capacity of industry to bear. Brought up against reality in this way, trade unionists are no more inclined than other rational men to insist on the impossible. What is essential is that the political parties should rid themselves and the country of the notion that wage disputes are any longer straight fights between employer and employed: and in any particular case the Government should have the patience and the prudence to confine itself to holding the ring until this truth dawns.
There is, however, another and even more important limit on practicable wage concessions. Both parties are committed to maintaining full employment, but neither party is or ought to be committed to financing it out of inflation. What has made the steady rise in wages possible in recent years, and what has led to the consequent rise in prices, is the general and on the whole well-justified assumption that, somehow or other, the money to pay for increased wages and to enable the consumer to afford increased prices will be forthcoming. The method of supplying it may be concealed or direct Government subsidies, easy lending, or inflated public expenditure, but the result will always be the same, to create a state of affairs in which no employer can say truthfully and with assurance, 'I am very sorry, but there isn't any more in the kitty, and the customer will not buy our goods if prices go up again.' A vigilant fiscal policy which keeps a proper relation between the money avail- able for spending and the extent of national production, which compensates for undue increases in wages by curtailing public spending or making private borrowing harder, can alone enable this to be said again. The alternative, to try to teach the worker economics without tears, by granting his demands but explaining that in six months or so they will be offset by higher prices, has simply failed.
Previous page
