Success—Minus £5,soo,000
The habit of rejoicing when a nationalised enterprise makes a smaller loss this year than it did last seems to be taking a rather strong, and rather disconcerting grip on the British public. But it does so happen that the reduction of the joint deficit of the two British airline corporations to £5,544,695 in the year 1950-51 was achieved by genuine economies in working and may be still further reduced by this means without the infliction of any real hardship on the passengers. It is therefore to be welcomed as a pgssible harbinger of that almost extinct phenomenon—a surplus. When economies can be achieved by such simple means as cutting out free drinks, free meals and free bus-rides to passengers there is no need to hesitate. It is only surprising that the cuts have not been made sooner, for even in the world of international competition for air passengefs a cheap British ticket may be able to hold its own even against a free French meal. It is also difficult to see why there should be any hesitation about requiring the Post Office to pay the full cost of carriage of air mail letters, even if that has an adverse effect on the accounts of the G.P.O.- If Government enterprises are to lose money there is at least some merit in having accounts which reveal exactly which ones are losing it. The same principle cuts both ways and affects the B.E.A.'s reference to the burden of the fuel tax, for there is no reason why Government enterprises should be excused the taxes which private companies have to pay. If the B.E.A. is suggesting that the tax should be cut for all parties, well and gOpd. It is refreshing to find a nationalised enterprise taking an independent line against a nationalising Government. In fact, it is the next best thing to free enterprise.
Previous page
