Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economicsMacassey, Lynden Livingston
History
Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economics
Macassey, Lynden Livingston
Industrial policy -- Great Britain; Labor economics -- Great Britain; Labour Party (Great Britain)
The delegate who moved the resolution pointed out that there were
different opinions in the Labour Party as to control; one section
advocating nationalization pure and simple, another a system of control
not necessarily involving nationalization, and that for the guidance of
the whole Labour movement an inquiry, as suggested by the resolution,
was essential so that “instead of having so many pious resolutions they
would have facts and data upon which to build their future policy and
activity,” The guidance sought has not yet been given.
At the same conference another resolution was adopted as follows:
“That this Conference re-affirms its pledge of nationalization
of industry, but, when nationalized, to come under joint
control with adequate representation of the workers on the
boards.”
The mover of it thought the previous resolution might include
co-partnership, and to that he objected. In co-partnership, he said, “the
workers interested became as great aristocrats as the ordinary employer.
Every industry ought to be nationalized and have adequate representation
under joint control.”
Labour’s Report to the Industrial Conference, 1919
In a memorandum by the Right Hon. A. Henderson, Chairman of the Trades
Union representatives, which was appended to the Report of the Industrial
Conference in 1919 (_Parliamentary Paper_ 1919, Cmd. 501) appointed to
inquire into industrial unrest, there occur these statements of Labour
policy:
“CONTROL OF INDUSTRY.
(p. ii.) “With increasing vehemence Labour is challenging
the whole structure of capitalist industry as it now exists.
It is no longer willing to acquiesce in a system under which
industry is conducted for the benefit of the few. It demands
a system of industrial control which shall be truly democratic
in character. This is seen on the one hand in the demand for
public ownership of vital industries and services and public
control of services not nationalized which threaten the public
with the danger of monopoly or exploitation. It is also seen
in the increasing demand of the workers in all industries for
a real share in industrial control, a demand which the Whitley
Scheme, in so far as it has been adopted, has done little or
nothing to satisfy. This demand is more articulate in some
industries than others. It is seen clearly in the national
programmes of the railwaymen and of the miners; and it is less
clearly formulated by the workers in many other industries.
The workers are no longer prepared to acquiesce in a system in
which their labour is bought and sold as a commodity in the
labour market. They are beginning to assert that they have a
human right to an equal and democratic partnership in industry;
that they must be treated in future not as ‘hands’ or part of
the factory equipment, but as human beings with a right to use
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account