Film and TV Technician (1957)

150 FILM & TV TECHNICIAN November 1957 THE LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE Extracts from the General Secretary's Report THIS year's Labour Party Conference has led to even more post-mortems than usually follow the Party political event of the year. That is due partly to documents being presented to the Conference by the National Executive Committee which, in searching for unanimity, lacked clarity, partly because Labour's shadow Foreign Secretary, Aneurin Bevan, found himself at issue with the 'Bevanite' line on the H Bomb, and partly because, through Bevan no longer being a " Bevanite ", the strong " rebel " element in many constituency Parties lost their inspiration and idol for whom they have no adequate replacement. Yet, paradoxically, far from the Conference breaking up in a shambles, it maintained a unity of purpose, with minorities accepting majority decision, which is allimportant if victory is to be won at the next General Election, as Labour is determined it shall be. There were three main debates : on National Superannuation, on Public Ownership, and on Foreign Affairs, including Disarmament. National Superannuation Until recently most of the Labour Movement, including the Trades Union Congress, have been opposed to State pensions being based on an individual's earnings. The policy document " National Superannuation " approved by the Conference shows how new thinking with investigation and reexamination of a difficult problem can lead to a different and acceptable policy. No one will quarrel with that part of the proposals which will lead to a Labour Government raising the basic old-age pension to £3 a week and it, subsequently, keeping pace with any rise in the cost of living. Contention was on the proposals for eventual half-pay retirement for all on a contributory scheme basis with the investment of the scheme's funds in commercial firms, which, it was claimed, was essential to make such a plan work, as did existing private schemes. Some critics wanted the entire scheme financed out of taxation, but Ft. H. S. Crossman, who introduced the scheme for the Executive, not only drew attention to the increase in taxation that this might involve but also argued that the insurance principle was a vital safeguard, for without it governments could cut pensions in times of stress. Points not Pressed Mr. Crossman also argued that so long as the trade unions and the community generally accepted different wage levels, so unequal pensions should be accepted. He also pointed to the trade unions in answering criticisms that the Insurance Fund should be able to invest in private industry, saying some unions had done so with satisfaction. None of the critics pressed their points after a very able reply to the discussion by Dick Crossman; the critical resolutions were withdrawn and the document itself accepted. Public Ownership The second main debate resulted in the adoption, by a five to one majority, of 'Industry and Society', the Executive Committee's policy document on future public ownership. It was in many ways a remarkable debate, with delegates such as Herbert Morrison and Emmanuel Shinwell leading the rebels from the floor — a 30-40 year flashback, probably. Criticism was on two main grounds. Firstly, it was not clear what the Executive's intentions were, and it was clear, even if unsatisfactory, that a number of critical delegates only withdrew their opposition on the strength of what the platform spokesmen interpreted the document as meaning. Indeed, Harold Wilson told us we should have been at the Press conference when the document was published, then all would have been well! The second main ground of criticism was that, even after the explanations and interpretations, it was completely unsatisfactory, both on the grounds of principle and practicalities, to interpret Labour's policy of public owner ship and control by purchasing shares without necessarily obtaining control, in a number of the country's key privately owned companies. The critics lost by 5} million to li million on the reference back and by 6 million to 600,000 on the amendment. The document was then approved by 5.309,000 to 1,276,000. Foreign Affairs On Foreign Affairs there was no division in the Conference and a resolution was passed setting forth a stated list of objectives including the peaceful reunification of Germany; reduction in armaments; extension of international trade; establishment of a permanent United Nations police force; the admission of China to the Security Council; and general discussion with the leaders of the U.S.S.R.. China and Peoples' Democracies. Disarmament There were three composite motions on disarmament : two in general terms and the third calling for unilateral renunciation by Great Britain of the testing or manufacture of nuclear weapons. The other resolutions proposed the immediate suspension by Britain of the H Bomb tests, but they sought the support of all nations through the United Nations for an actual ban on production, destruction of existing stocks and progressive disarmament. It was the difference between Great Britain taking the initiative in stopping production or, on the other hand, only moving by international agreement with other countries, that led to Aneurin Bevan's unpopularity with his erstwhile supporters. They wanted Britain to act unilaterally. Bevan did not. There was contradiction in argument by Bevan as much as anybody else. He made the obvious point : it is no use producing if you are not going to test; yet he accepted there should be no testing but not the cessation of production. He argued that if Britain renounced, unilaterally, the use, testing and manufacture of nuclear weapons, it would be unable to influence American or Russian policies, and in any case we couldn't act alone in these matters, having responsibilities to the Commonwealth. Eventually, Mr. Bevan carried Conference "with him by 5,836,000 to 781,000, and the other two composite resolutions were carried unanimously. George Elvin.