THE GOVERNMENT AND FUEL SIR,—I think with you that the
Government would have been better advised to have adhered in principle to the Beveridge Scheme, and for the very reason set forth by Sir John Percival in his letter in The Spectator of June tzth. Let us, as Mr. J. R. M. Whitehorn says in his artic:e " Arnold and 1942," proceed " along the lines of reason." Most questions which harry the minds of those with small incomes are governed by the word " margin," and this is evident not least in fuel. It may be perfectly practicable for Sir John Percival, and others similarly placed, to work on their own 80 per cent. norm., but what about those who have to make do on perhaps 8o per cent. below the norm. prescribed by the several famous investigators? Not only is the cost of prime importance, but in small homes and tenements storage space is practically nil. People so placed cannot therefore assist the community (or inci- dentally themselves) by buying in summer, since they have neither the spare cash nor even the accommodation to contemplate a heavy stock. Again, how can economy be effected in the majority of such homes when by the very token of low income-levels that has already been automati- cally prearranged? Why I know a man who between the wars had to visit, near Christmas-time, in the course of his duty, certain people on behalf of a big organisation (not a charitable one) and found many in bed during the day time. This so intrigued him that he enquired the reason from one or two of those visited. In each case it was ascertained that fuel was so dear and/or difficult to obtain that they had perforce to remain in bed for warmth. What a waste of potential human energy! Indeed, this latter may be one reason why those affected are sometimes dubbed lazy. Such people can only think about subsistence levels, not sea levels.
No, Sir, Sir John Percival must think again in terms of Reason, Margins, and the capacity to appreciate the disproportion in numbers of those represented by him in his letter, and of those whose viewpoints I have tried to express. I wonder did the Government defer to the former and neglects the latter when it shelved the Beveridge Scheme— I wonder! Why not ration and be done with it?—Yours, &c., 54 Hortensia House, Hortensia Road, S.W. to. W. H. PARRY.
Previous page
