(Applause.) But I have no hesitation in saying that I am on the side of those who think that a greater collective element should be introduced into the State and municipalities. I should like to see the State undertaking new functions, particularly stepping forward into those spheres of activity which are governed by an element of monopoly. (Applause.) Your tramways and so on; your great public works, which are of a monopolistic and privileged character – there I see a wide field for State enterprise to embark upon. But when we are told to exalt and admire a philosophy which destroys individualism and seeks to replace it by collectivism, I say that is a monstrous and imbecile conception which can find no real foothold in the brains and hearts – and the hearts are as trustworthy as the brains – in the hearts of sensible people. (Loud cheers.)

‘I AM THE BOARD OF TRADE’

4 February 1909

Chamber of Commerce dinner, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

If there is any office in the Government which should claim a friendly reception it is the Board of Trade. In a sense I am the Board of Trade. (Laughter.) I preside over a Board which for centuries has not met. One constitutes a quorum. I am that quorum. But in a larger sense the Board of Trade is a great apparatus of beneficent Government organisation, a great accumulation of knowledge, and it has a staff which is quite equal to the very finest flavour of the Civil Service. Its attitude is non-partisan. It has relations with all parties and with the leaders not only of industrial enterprise but of the trade unions, and both sides are willing to give the Board the best information they have when any important question arises. The statutory powers of the Board are large, and the amount of work done that is outside the statutory powers, by goodwill and conciliation, is also great. Both sides know that they will get fair treatment, and that there will be no hanky-panky or jerrymandering in dealing with different interests and different classes. This undoubtedly gives the Board in its larger aspect an influence far outside any power that is conferred upon it by Parliament. (Cheers.) Its three great principles, enunciated by my predecessor, are ‘Confer, Conciliate, and Compromise’.

THE BUDGET: ‘CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE OR DIE’

22 May 1909

Free Trade Hall, Manchester

Considering that you have all been ruined by the Budget – (laughter), – I think it very kind of you to receive me so well. When I remember all the injuries you have suffered – how South Africa has been lost – (laughter); – how the gold mines have been thrown away; how all the splendid army which Mr Brodrick got together – (laughter) – has been reduced to a sham; and how, of course, we have got no navy of any kind whatever – (laughter), – not even a fishing smack, for all the 35 millions a year we give the Admiralty; and when I remember that in spite of all these evils the taxes are so oppressive and so cruel that any self-respecting Conservative will tell you he cannot afford either to live or die – (laughter), – when I remember all this, Mr Chairman, I think it remarkable that you should be willing to give me such a hearty welcome back to Manchester. Yes, gentlemen, when I think of the colonies we have lost, of the Empire we have alienated, of the food we have left untaxed – (laughter), – and the foreigners we have left unmolested – (laughter), – and the ladies we have left outside – (laughter) – I confess I am astonished you are glad to see me here again.

‘A VIOLENT RUPTURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CUSTOM’

4 September 1909

Palace Theatre, Leicester

A constitutional crisis was looming in consequence of the threat of the House of Lords, which at the time represented the landed aristocracy, to reject the Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George’s, ‘People’s Budget’. The Chancellor sought an extra £4 million to enable him to introduce retirement pensions for the elderly and to build seven new Dreadnoughts (battleships) for the Royal Navy. He proposed doing this by increasing taxation on the wealthier sections of society, especially the property owners. Churchill’s defiant threat to the House of Lords earned him an amazing rebuke from the King, in the form of an unprecedented letter to The Times from the King’s Private Secretary.

A general election consequent upon the rejection of the Budget by the Lords would not, ought not, and could not be fought upon the Budget alone. – (Cheers.) Budgets come, as the late Lord Salisbury said in 1894, and Budgets go. Every Government has its own expenditure for each year. Every Government has hitherto been entitled to make its own provision to meet that expenditure. There is a Budget every year. Memorable as the Budget of my right hon. friend may be, far-reaching as is the policy dependent upon it, the Finance Bill, after all, is only in its character an annual affair. But the rejection of the Budget by the House of Lords would not be an annual affair. – (Loud and prolonged cheering.) It will be a violent rupture of constitutional custom and usage extending over 300 years, and recognised during all that time by the leaders of every party in the State. It would involve a sharp and sensible breach with the traditions of the past.