By Q, M: Grew is generally agreed by the man in the "street that Lord Beaverbrook's appointment as Minister of State,"a new position in this "country though the title is well enough Known in France, means that he will be 'a sort of Deputy Prime Minister. On all grounds it has been enthusiastically welcomed. Lord Beaverbrook has been an outstanding success as Minister for Aircraft Production, He has initiative, drive, magnet tism, and is a ruthless cutter of red tape.
In his new office he should take a great deal of the heavy load from Mr, Churchill's shoulders, and the conduct of the war will benefit from there being one able and not afraid to take swift decisions in matters where speed is imperative and the Prime Minister, owing to the enormous demands upon him, simply has not the time to give them, So very soon we may see Lord Beaverbrook competing with Mr. Churchill for first place in the abusive hatred of Goebbels and "Haw Haw."
There is a strong feeling both in Press and Parliament that changes in the Govern= ment are needed. Wheh forming it a. year ago Mr, Churchill naturally wished to give it the most thoroughly national character possible, But after twelve months, the Manchester Guardian," which is anything but unfriendly to Labour says bluntly that the Labour Ministers have not proved their ability to rise to the necessities of a war. This from such a source, is impressive, though the diMeulty of replacing them without offence to the whole body of Labour is obvious. It is equally obvious that, in war, no personal considerations should weigh for fa moment, But unfortunately it is very dim cult to disregard them.
Another point of disquietude may be mentioned, Sir Kingsley Wood was congratulated by everybody on the boldness of his Budget, and the 10s. income tax has been accepted with fortitude by all in spite of its unfair incidence on the small salaried man, married and with two or three children, But as "The Times" says, we should ike to see the Chancellor equally bold in cutting down waste in Government expenditure," Recently for example, the Auditor General on the Army Appropriation Account issued a report showing, {he enormous inevease in the eventual cost of factories over the original estimate, 'Thus one ordinance factory, estimated in 1927 to cost 20,050,000 yese 10 £11,200,000 in 1940, Storage works estimated at £760,000 in 1985, finally came out, at' 124,111,000. The Militia training camps cost '£80 millions instead of the expected £20 millions. The Auditor-General says that there have been similar excesses in respect of Naval training establishments. There is now a hue and cry after joy-rider wasting petrol. It seems, however, as if the ration Is to be cut down, no doubt quite properly, But what of official usage of petrol? Again "The'Times" reported that one Army establishment had spent over £3 in transport to send a sum of Gs. 11d, From instances of.similar waste of petrol. which have come to my knowledge this sort of thing is by no means exceptional. One may also mention the Instances of boys of fifteen or sixteen who are being paid £3, £4 even £5 a week: they come up in the police courts every few days, How many of such boys are employed by the Government no one knows, But the extravagant nature of such pay, which often obviously demoralizes the recipient, adds to the general feeling that with better supervision taxation might be less crushing.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.