SUGAR-COATED PILL FOR STEEL STOCKHOLDERS
The adoption of the White Paper in the House of Commons May 6, while seeming to assure the renationalization of the steel industry also indicated a certain fissuring of the Labour party. Two aspects of the White Paper and of the debate in the House of Commons revealed a lot of shady maneuvering and a most sensitive concern for the stockholders.
First of all, there was the proposed compensation. Marxists are in general opposed to paying compensation when nationalizations occur, since it can easily be demonstrated that. the capitalists have been paid many times over through their profits, and even if they were not, their private interests could not be permitted to stand in the way of the needs of the people. But as Marx and Trotsky pointed out, compensation is not a matter of principle. Whether a workers government should or should not pay compensation in a given instance is a problem of tactics and the relationship of social forces.
In Britain, however, the problem has its own peculiarities, The Attlee government nationalized the industry after Labour's 1945 victory. The Tories, coming back into power in 1951, denationalized steel. The Labour party leaders then made a solemn pledge to renationalize as soon as they again came into power, and not let the private owners get. another juicy bonus aut of renationalization after the very handsome gift from the Tories, "
- But Wilson's White Paper: proposes rates of compensation which are 20% to 40% above the current quotations on the stock market! The Financial Times published the following table giving the figures for the various companies:
Propos ed Lee nee No, of shares Compensation Price Thursday's Price Company (in millions) shillings pence shillings pence
Colvilles 19.51 47 6 28 O Consett 10.00 19 1O L5 6 Dorman Long 22.00 29 LO 23 9 Lancashire 9.00 — B4 BO 21 4-1/2 South Durham 13.87 26 3 19 9 Steel of Wales 40.00 32 5 19 9 Stewart & Lloyds 49.50 32 5 29 9 Summers (John) 30.48 . 36 O 29 3
3 27 6 United Steel 50.00 58
Adhering to the tradition of British understatement with admirable discipline, the editor of the Financial Times commented: "It must be admitted at once that the basis for compensating shareholders in quoted steel companies is fair and that the. terms are better than
expected, The Government, which clearly has its eye on foreign opinion [Wall Street and the White House] as well as on the strength of the opposition to its proposals, may even be criticised by Labour's left wing for being unnecessarily generous..."
In fact Ian Mikardo, a member of the executive of the Labour party and one of the late Aneurin Bevan's lieutenants, did complain, although not very loudly, against what he called "madly over-generous" compensation. In the May 7 Tribune, he wrote that "During the few. hours of that Central Hall meeting, some people made more money (taxfree) out, of steel shares than a locomotive-driver, a docker or a miner can earn in his whole working life."
This "unearned capital gains" so generously handed the coupan clippers is all the more scandalous in face of the government propa-=ganda about there not being enough money to pay the old~age pension-. ers the moderate increase they were promised or to permit the workers to get a wage adjustment to meet the rising cost of living. There is money enough when the stockholders in the steel industry hold out their. hands -= even more than they expected!
While grumblings were heard in the left wing of the Labour party over Wilson's uncommonly solicitous concern for the feelings of the stockholders, a second scandal occurred. During the debate in the House of Commons over steel nationalization, George Brown, Wilson's economica minister stated that while he favored 100% govern-~ ment ownership he was willing "to listen" to any proposal to the contrary from the steel barons,
Brown had no authority from any Labour party body to make such a concession. It took the Labour MP's and apparently even some of the cabinet members by surprise. Some stormy scenes followed that led to charges of a gross breach of discipline.
Brown's "excuse" was that it was just a maneuver to get two recalcitrant right-wing members of the Labour party, Woodrow Wyatt and Desmond Donnelly, to vote in favor of the White Paper. More likely it was a maneuver to open the way to a new attack against 100% nationalization of the steel industry.
ELECTRIC SHOCK TORTURE