THE CHALLENGE OF LONDON
By KENNETH LINDSAY, M.P.
SIX weeks ago I pleaded in these columns that the London Region should have its own democratic dictator and that the name of Mr. Morrison would commend itself to the majority of Londoners. Since then, Mr. Morrison has described the idea as childish and poetic from the point of view of public administration. I believe he is wrong. It is not only that in addition to Home Security duiie, e has had to grapple with the problem of aliens, introduce a Bill for the prolongation of Parliament and answer questions in the House of Commons on all Home Office matters, but that the Chief Commissioner himself is apparently and very sadly a sick man. The mere fact of a figurehead would give renewed confidence to officials, voluntary workers and the people. Much more important, however, would be the executive direction given on countless points of policy.
But the difficulties lie deeper. Home policy is not yet adapted to war conditions ; Regional Commissioners have insufficient powers. Let me give two samples of official state- ments. One is by Mr. MacDonald on health in shelters. " The local authorities are acting as the agents of the central Organisation, and it is the London Regional organisation under the Minister of Home Security which is responsible. They issue :heir instructions to the local authorities, who are supposed :o carry them out." Here is a question and answer two months after the Battle of London started: "Which Department is responsible for organising the labour supply for cleaning up London debris and who is responsible for the execution of the task?" Answer: "The Department responsible . . . is the Ministry of Labour. The executive responsibility for the execution of the work in London has been entrusted to Sir Warren Fisher, whom my predecessor appointed. . . . The London County Council have been good enough to put at the disposal of the Special Commissioner a controlling staff familiar with the kindred work of the rescue and demolition parties for which they are responsible." In fact, of course, crrne 10,000 Auxiliary Military. Pioneers have been brought n to tackle the problem. Nobody could claim that these quotations illustrate a clear and coherent executive organisation capable of facing War and winter. But there is another danger. Almost every day some new and solemn announce- ment of policy is made by Ministers. This is quite a novel sPeme, of publicity. But the people make their judgements When the goods are delivered. They are sick and tired of being told about their "spirit." Discussion of organisation may easily become boring, and yet I am convinced that bad organisation has been responsible. in London for needless worry and suffering. It is interesting to read of Liverpool: "Just as the A.R.P. services have their control-rooms, so have the Liverpool welfare services." And later, "Liverpool does realise that the homeless are casualties and require as kindly handling as though they had lost a limb instead of a home." So writes Mr. Ritchie Calder. That quotation illustrates to my mind a planned and simplified organisation. Is it too late to give the London Region some- thing comparable? Why take Mr. Newton, who has set to work six hundred teachers on communal cooking for the homeless and gasless, away from his job in the middle of a war and make him Entertainment Adviser to the L.C.C., and why ask Dr. Mallon to advise on catering, when no man in London would be better at organising recreation for the homeless and shelter population? Why not use the Royal Engineers to help overworked Borough Surveyors and Engineers (one has had no holiday for two and a half years) who are trying in vain to cope with damp and deficient shelters? Why not use idle Army lorries to remove and store the furniture of the homeless when in one Borough alone there are two hundred cases in arrears and when a charge is being made of six pounds a day for a van and three men? Why not make some of the personnel in First-Aid posts and shelters interchangeable, when hundreds have had little or nothing to do for weeks? Every time one comes back full-elide to executive organisation in a confusion of authorities.
Meanwhile the defiant and leaderless people continue to show a patience and cheerfulness which has to be seen to be believed. Nothing will daunt them. Let me take you to a large shelter under a well-known church where nightly six hundred people spend their evenings and sleep. A voluntary staff, under the inspiration of the padre and his wife, now provide books, hot drinks and food, first-aid, a cinema and— after provocation—a simple evening service. Nine-tenths of this community are " regulars " and sleep in their accustomed space. Bunks havc not yet arrived. The local coffee-stall provides the morning meal.
Westminster can now boast that it has three paid welfare officers for its shelters and a caterer-in-chief. Its library service has gone underground, and in addition five thousand " Penguins " have been distributed. Meals are served to nearly thirty thousand people. But less rich boroughs have excellent shelter committees, where concerts and talks on current events are becoming the order of the evening. Self-help is evident in many a smaller shelter, under a shop or basement. A new comradeship has grown from sharing a common danger.
If London needs better organisation to face war conditions, the reception areas in town and countryside equally need careful and imaginative plans for dealing with British refugees. A recent visit to Cambridgeshire shows what might have hap- pened to thousands instead of tens. Village colleges can pro- vide a spacious social life for adults in the evening, as well as education for the children. County and smaller authorities will have to display every possible resource to keep their new and urban inhabitants through the winter months. Once again we must ask whether the Ministry of Health, as the central and guiding authority, has laid adequate plans in the various Regions, and whether the Board of Education is rising to the occasion. Again, week-ends for working boys, rest-weeks for tired Civil Defence workers, increased facilities for the re-uniting of sundered families, are all part of the war effort on the home front.
There is fine talk of rebuilding London, and reconstruction after the war. At the moment .we must concentrate every energy on preserving the social and family life and the social services. It is better news that less than 120,000 schoolchildren are left in London, though of course only a fraction of these attend school and profit by the allied milk and medical services. It is well that Rest Centres are losing their numbers, but thou- sands of bombed persons have never been near a Rest Centre ; • they live for the most part a shelter life. "All clear" in the air does not mean "all clear" on the ground. The results of de- molished houses, the dislocation of broken families, the problem of the half-habitable home, these human questions linger long after the raids are forgotten. I hope Mr. Willink's thirty-two social workers are active on all these problems.
In this war distinction between civilian and soldier is blurred. It has been the peculiar role of London to force this matter on the whole country and on the Government. I hope the effect will be to deepen the unity of purpose throughout the land. Much courage and much patience will be required during the Winter months in London—and outside. This is London's challenge.
Previous page
