My Life

My Life - Oswald Mosleyan end. ... If this loan cannot be raised then unemployment, as an emergency andimmediate problem, cannot be dealt with.'I have no doubt that we shall hear from the right hon. Member for Epping [Mr.Churchill] in answer to this latter part of my case, what he has so often described asthe Treasury view: the view that any money loans raised by the Government must betaken from other industrial activities and will put out of employment as many men asare put in employment. How far is that case supported by the present Government?' (Iknew, of course, by then that Snowden in this matter completely agreed withChurchill.) 'I should like to have the views of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, forevery argument with which I have been met seems to support that case.'I admit that there is some force in that view in a period of acute deflation. If you arepursuing a deflationary policy, restricting the whole basis of credit, it is difficult toraise large loans for such purposes as this.... Given, however, a financial policy ofstabilisation, that Treasury point of view cannot hold water. It would mean that everysingle new enterprise is going to put as many men out of employment as it willemploy. That is a complete absurdity if you pursue that argument to its logicalconclusion. If it is true, it means that nothing can ever be done by the Government orby Parliament. It means that no Government has any function or any purpose; it is apolicy of complete surrender. It has been said rather curiously, in view of the modestyof my programme, that it is the policy of the "red flag". I might reply that what isknown as the Treasury view is the policy of the "white flag". It is a policy ofsurrender, of negation, by which any policy can be frustrated and blocked in thiscountry.'The argument I advanced would now be almost universally accepted, but it was thenrejected by both front benches and opposed by the whole weight of the partymachines. The time-lag between the acceptance of new thinking, or even of new facts,is indeed disturbing in an age when facts continue to move so much faster than theminds of men.I clinched this argument with a reference to the Government's faulty method ofseeking conversion which included a quotation from the President of the Board ofTrade speaking a few days earlier—'During the past fortnight alone £16,000,000 ofnew capital has been authorised or raised for overseas investment, and so I trust theprocess will continue'—and commented 'Why? Why is it so right and proper anddesirable that capital should go overseas to equip factories to compete against us, tobuild roads and railways in the Argentine or in Timbuctoo, to provide employment forpeople in those countries, while it is supposed to shake the whole basis of ourfinancial strength if anyone dares to suggest the raising of money by the Governmentof this country to provide employment?'Here we see the beginning of the clash between a producers' and a financiers' policy,between my desire to develop a home market based on the purchasing power of ourown people, accompanied by the concentration of our resources for the developmentof this system, and the traditional view that we should lend money abroad andencourage a swollen export trade for the purpose of building a strong position ininternational finance. The initial inspiration of this large development of policycertainly goes back to my speech at my first election in 1918 when I used the phrase210 of 424