Labour and the Public Corporation
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1954.tb01308.x |
| Author | A. H. Hanson |
| Published date | 01 June 1954 |
| Date | 01 June 1954 |
Labour
and
the
Public
Corporation
By
A.
H.
HANSON
Mr.
Hanson’s enquiries have brought to light an interesting early
memorandum
on
the organisation
of
a nationalised coal
industry.
MR.
CHESTER’S
lecture to the Manchester Statistical Society, published
in the Spring,
1952,
issue of
PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION,
explains the
main reasons for the Labour Party’s adoption
of
the semi-independent,
non-representative, ministerially-appointed Public Corporation as its main
vehicle for the nationalisation of industry.
It
is clear, however, that much
research remains to be done on the actual processes by which the new
conception of nationalisation, so different from that which prevailed through-
out the
1920s,
came to dominate the thoughts
of
the most influential leaders
of the Labour and Trade Union Movements. Although the Public Corpora-
tion idea enjoyed increasing popularity among non-Labour politicians,
economists and business men after the establishment of the British Broad-
casting Corporation and the Central Electricity Board,
it
did not become
part of Labour’s official policy until the early
1930s,
and even then only
after prolonged and acrimonious debates in Labour Party Conferences and
Trade Union Congresses, where its protagonists had to fight hard for its
full acceptance. Clearly, a process
of
“
conversion
”
must have been taking
place in the late
1920s,
but
it
occurred
so
obscurely that materials for docu-
menting it are very scarce.
The introduction into Parliament in
1931
of Mr. Herbert Morrison’s
London Passenger Transport
Bill
is, of course, a landmark
;
but this measure
was the product neither of a Conference decision nor of a long-matured
plan, fully discussed in the organisations of the Labour Movement, and
there is abundant evidence that it gave a considerable shock to many sections
of Labour opinion. Not only did it reject municipalisation
;
it jettisoned
the whole idea of
“
joint control,” which had been a basic feature of official
nationalisation policies since the presentation of the Miners’ Bill to the
Sankey Commission in
1919.1
Even
so,
there was no general realisation in Labour circles that Mr.
Morrison was quite consciously making a new departure in nationalisation
policy. London transport, it might be argued, presented a distinct problem.
The Labour Government, moreover, being dependent on the support of the
Liberals, did not have a free hand in the formulation of its one and only
essay in socialisation. The L.P.T.B., therefore, might reasonably be regarded
as an ad
hoc
solution-the best that could be obtained under existing political
circumstances-to a problem that demanded immediate treatment
;
and
Labour might continue to hold its apparently firmly-rooted belief that
“
socialisation,” as distinct from
“
capitalist nationalisation,” implied at least
a substantial share by the representatives of the workers in the control and
administration of the industry concerned.2
Subsequent events, however, proved that Mr. Morrison and his associates
were thinking in quite different terms. For them, the L.P.T.B. was no
mere
ad
hoc
solution
;
it was the pattern for future nationalisation. Their
203
To continue reading
Request your trial