Wet canteens for women
Mostly he seems pissed off because loony temperance ideas were rightly ignored during WW II. Which is why he mentions WW I, where governemnt stupidly leant their ear to such extremist nonsense.
"DRINK-PROMOTING" BY GOVERNMENTThere's a typical temperance worry about women drinking. It was an obsession of the Victorians, a recurring theme in the 20th century and still a hot topic today. Negative stories about women and alcohol are still common in the shittier type of UK newspaper. As if the odd half of beer in the works canteen was going to corrupt those poor impressionable girls?
METHOD MINISTER'S IMMODERATION
The Rev. Noel F. Hutchcroft, superintendent of the Birmingham (Methodist) Central Mission, yesterday issued a statement to his congregation on what he termed the Government’s drink-promoting policy.” He said; While no patriot has any right to hinder his country’s leaders by unnecessary criticism, it is his duty to draw attention to serious danger. The Government has, by the most amazing action seen in England for a century, created a situation by its drink-promoting policy and campaign which is at once an offence to common sense and decency and a peril to the nation’s chances of victory.
"During the last war the merchant navies of all neutral and allied States (including France, Italy and Japan) carried our food across the seas. To-day we fight without this enormous aid. The loss of such essential foods as eggs, bacon, milk and those citrous fruits which alone can maintain adequately the supply of necessary vitamins is made the more sinister when it is remembered that these shortages are seriously aggravated by the enormous consumption of pure, human foodstuffs and good animal and poultry foods in brewing. Yet the production of beer is still sanctioned at 100 per cent., though mysterious references are made to 'great reductions' when protests are addressed to the evasive Lord Woolton. In fact, the consumption of barley is fully as great as before the war and the shortage of that food is a chief contributor to the shortage of meat, milk and eggs. The British Government is not only prepared to sacrifice food and health for beer, but it has adopted methods which leave any student of the effect of alcohol on efficiency completely amazed.
“For months the evidence of history and science has been pressed on the Cabinet for consideration, but instead of inducing a sound policy it is set aside and ignored, and now the Government has thrown aside all restraint and emerged as the principal advocate and advertiser of the beer industry. It is not merely that the tone of broadcasting is alcoholic, but the very official activities of propaganda are the medium for drink advocacy. A recent publication bearing the words 'The Army at War, Issued for the War Office by the Min. of Information’ declares beer to be to Englishmen 'the most requisite and wholesome of luxuries.’
The latest development of the Government’s drink advertising campaign is the most sinister. While every endeavour is being made to enlist girls in the uniformed services, the authorities have decided to introduce wet canteens for girls and women. This action in deliberately placing temptation and danger in the way of young girls fresh from home should shock the mothers of the nation and will undoubtedly prove a deterrent to all parents who have any anxiety about their young daughters.
“It might be said rightly that the modern girl is a fine type capable of looking after herself, but what right has the Government to join forces with the trade in liquor to conspire to put very real danger in their way? The first victim of alcohol is moral discretion. The Government is guilty of a betrayal of the nation’s youth in this and another Order. What can be said for the action in introducing an Order in Council permitting the establishment of beer canteens in every factory and even in hostels? It drives straight through all the careful legislation of past years, designed by painful experience.
"In an alleged democracy it permits action of at least highly questionable character to be undertaken without any reference to the views of the nation. It ignored the mass of evidence from science to prove that alcohol is the No. 1 enemy of efficiency and production. It overlooks the lessons of the last war. The Government has no mandate from the nation for these revolutionary proposals. They are an outrage to the finer feelings of the nation.
“The people of England have a right to ask what is the reason for the complete surrender of their highest interests to a traffic which is no friend to victory. Why is it necessary to pretend that alcohol is more to the nation than patriotism It is freely stated by the Trade ’ that the Government dare not restrict beer output for fear of causing unrest. That is tantamount to saying that the average British worker and soldier thinks more of beer than of hjs nation’s survival. Such a view is an insult to the men as it is to the intelligence of those who entertain it. Let the Government give the country the facts relating to food and production, and we can well afford to leave the result to the better nature of our people.”
Birmingham Daily Post - Tuesday 25 November 1941, page 2.
The we have the "food destruction" argument, which is total rubbish. Far more food value is obtained by turning barley into beer than using it to feed pigs. But simple facts aren't enough for this type of fanatic. Rather like those who ignore exprts today because their concusions aren't what they want to hear.
What did Rev. Hutchcroft want? Total Prohibition, obviously. Something which would have had a massive negative impact on morale. The twat. Thankfully pisshead Churchill was never going to cut of f alcohol supplies.