War and Demobilisation Problems

Since its formation the Alliance had dealt with a whole range of matters, but almost none of them had to do with a 'drastio change’ of society. The first question the Alliance dealt with in early 1916, concerned the problems that would be caused by demobilisation after the war. They recommended the then Prime Minister, Asquith:

that any departure from trade union practices which have been made to accelerate production and distribution shall terminate upon the resumption of peace;
that all workers, whether men or women, who have been employed as substitutes shall be on their disemployment provided with other work at standard living rates or with full maintenance
that the government be urged to arrange the demobilisation of all those who have joined for the duration of the war in such a manner as shall lead to their gradual absorption into civilian occupations;
that all men desiring to do so should be granted extended furloughs at full Army pay and with full separation and billeting allowance in order to recuperate themselves;
that Registration Bureaux be set un with an employment board, one half of which shall be trade union representatives appointed by their various trade unions, in order to deal with the transition stage, and when men who have severed their connection with the Army cannot procure such work they shall be assured maintenance allowance.

Later in 1916 the Triple Alliance discussed some practical matters, that arose out of the war situation. They wanted an increase of the workmen's compensation to meet the increased cost of living; and a minimum wage to agricultural workers. The growing number of people that had to be sent to the front, caused a certain labour shortage in the industries. The Alliance protested against this. Even more vehemently, however, they protested against the measures the government took, or proposed to take, to fill the vacancies:the introduction of coloured labour, the increased use of Chinese and other Asiatics in Admiralty transport ships and in the mercantile marine, and the formation of mobile labour battallions under military control - the so-called industrial conscription. With regards to the introduction of coloured labour, the Triple Alliance feared that this would reduce the western Standard of life, promoted and achieved by generations of workingclass effort.

It was argued in the Triple Alliance, that the conscription - which was considered necessary by the Government - should have been preceded by the conscription of wealth. In order to prepare for a real equality of individual sacrifice, they called, therefore, for a registration of wealth and property.

In early 1918 the Triple Alliance discussed income tax, food supplies, food prices, an extension of the Provision of Meals Act, and pensions for soldiers and sailors. They wanted an income tax only upon incomes above the point assuring to the workers at least a pre-war Standard of living, with regards to the food, they demanded government control of all food commodities, and of their apportionment equally among the people. Additionally, they demanded the relief of all increases due to excess profits, war risk charges etc. from primary articles of food. The extension of the Provision of Meals Act was demanded to enable education authorities to supply children with boots and clothes in necessitous cases.

The usual action of the Triple Alliance in these matters was the arrangement of a meeting with the Prime Minister. If they succeeded in a meeting, they usually got some vague concessions. In the case of the introduction of coloured labour, also openly advocated by Arthur Henderson - Labour minister of the Coalition Government - the Government retreated, when the Alliance threatened industrial action. The Alliance claimed this as a victory and as a sign that no government in time of war could ignore the views of three out of the four most important groups of workers in the country and - if it could be held together - perhaps after the war as well. “There is nobody in the world", Bevin - the Dockers’ leader - told his colleagues, “who submits to anything but force. Force is the logic of reason after all and the only reason they will respond to is that which is backed up by power".

One can wonder, how impressed Lloyd George was by the sabre-rattling, since he addressed the deputation of the Triple Alliance at the meeting where the introduction of coloured labour was discussed, with the words: "Mr. Thomas, Mr. Smillie, and others of the doves of the movement…" Almost a year later Lloyd George showed his 'fears’ for the Triple Alliance, that wanted to discuss with him income tax, food prices and supplies, extension of the Provision of Meals Act, and pensions for soldiers and sailors. He refused this, because he was 'simply overwhelmed with pressing matters of State’.

It is clear, that all the above-mentioned practical matters affected the members of the Triple Alliance, but they affected the Labour movement as a whole as well. Several members of the Executive Councils of the affiliated bodies frequently pointed at that. The following utterance of T. Greenall, the Miners’ representative of Lancashire, is, therefore, no exception:

I fail to remember anything or have read of anything in connection with the Triple Alliance which justifies us in coming to the conclusion tnat the Triple Aiiiance was formed to deal with such questions as these. These are questions which affect the whole of the workers throughout the length and breadth of the country, and we know we are told that both the Labour Party and the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress have been trying to deal with these things, and we know that the representatives of the Food Control Committee have more than once stated that they are prepared to accept any suggestions, and would be pleased if the trades union rnovement and, the Labour Party of the country would come forward with some practical schemes,and let them know what they would suggest.

It seems, that Smillie wanted to take this line as well. In response to some criticism of the SWMF, that the Alliance did not press hard enough to get a meeting with Lloyd George to discuss income tax, food supplies and prices, etc. He said that it ought to have been in the power of the government to have protected the workers against the profiteering which had been going on with food. They had not done so - he added - and we may have to tell the government ultimately the Triple Alliance would have to take the matter in hand and do it . "But", he stated, "it ought not to be done by one section of the Labour movement. To do that kind of thing it ought to be the Labour movement as a whole”.

In the discussion on Demobilisation and Labour after the war, the Triple Alliance listed some principal matters as well:

The state appropriation and control of the mines, railways, and the means of coastal and oversea transport;
A genuine public spirited attempt to place the land under cultivation and to make employment in agricultural work at least as attractive as urban and industrial employment;
Raising the school age;
A national scheme of house building and town planning which might in time make villages, towns, and cities as congenial as the best of those on the continent;
All those provisions for the collective well-being which would subordinate the interest of the individual to the general advantage of the entire community.

All these matters, however, were considered "political in character which must be left to those bodies who represent labour in a more general sense" ( my emphasis, spr.) Although it is not difficult to see that the above-mentioned matters differ from the problems the Triple Alliance thought it was more appropriate to deal with - they transcend the mere working conditions like pay and its purchasing power - the difference is of a relative rather than a principle kind. They all concern the living conditions - partially determined by working conditions - of all workers in general, and not only those of the members of the three allied bodies in particular. So, although it is clear that a national scheme of house building and town planning is a matter that might be left ‘to those bodies who represent Labour in a more general sense’, it is equally not clear why demobilisation problems, income tax, supplies and prices of food should not be left to those bodies. To put it this way: it is not clear what functions the Triple Alliance had in relation to the functions of the Parliamentary Committee of the TUC and the Labour Party. The more so as they were simultaneously dealing with them.