2
99
Page 567 practice is. Indeed it is not accurate, since "rigging" usually implies some kind of price discrimination if not of dishonesty.. I should myself prefer something on the lines of "the prevention of price reductions as being clearer and more effective; I have in fact introduced this idea into the title of the White Paper and at one or two points in the text. But I do not think it would be appropriate to use it as the short title of the paper.
5. Popularisation.—It would be possible to give the White Paper a more popular tone. In particular the opening description of the practice could be given in more graphic and personal terms by depicting, for example, the plight of an individual trader who tries to pass on the benefits of his low costs to his customers and is smashed by the "ring." Here again, however, I think it will be better to keep within the conventional limits of the White Paper form. The press will in any event popularise the issue (although not necessarily in the sense we would wish!) and we can and should use the graphic method for presenting the case in the country. But we do not want, I suggest, the vulgarisation of White Papers made an issue.
6.
Emphasis. It will be seen that the draft rests the Government's case on two main planks. The first is the economic argument that, by eliminating competi- tion in a wide range of trade, resale price maintenance prevents some price reductions which could and should be made. It also slows up technical progress in distribution (e.g., self-service methods) because the trader who makes improvements and lowers his costs cannot by offering lower prices obtain a larger share of the market. This, of course, is the more important plank because it bears both on individual and collective resale price maintenance. The second plank is the legal and social impropriety of collective sanctions imposed by private bodies; this one by itself, though highly important, makes no contribution to the case against individual resale price maintenance.
7. The emphasis in the draft is placed pretty evenly on both planks. Some of my colleagues may feel that more should be made of the economic line of attack. and that for propaganda purposes the whole operation should be represented more as an assault on the cost-of-living problem with the stress laid on the price reductions which should ensue. I feel that it would be dangerous to overplay our hand in this respect. The abolition of resale price maintenance can do nothing to reverse the wider, external causes of rising prices; and in so far as there are shortages, ordinary economic pressures will keep prices at or near the permitted maxima, whether these are laid down in statutory price controls or by the manufacturers themselves. Thus the immediate effect on prices of carrying through our proposals may well be limited to a comparatively narrow range of goods. It is, no doubt, true that, whatever the general price-level, the abolition of resale price maintenance will result in some prices at some places being lower than the general level; in other words, some prices will be lower than they would otherwise have been, even though they may be higher (from other causes) than they are now. This effect may be of some value in cushioning the impact of any general price increase in branded goods. But it would be mistaken tactics to put too much stress on lower prices (which everybody will take to mean prices lower than they are now) if the most that we can really expect is higher prices mitigated by reductions here and there from the new general level. I think, therefore, that the balance of the draft is about right and I recommend that it should be left as it is.
Points of Substance
8. I now turn to certain points of substance in the draft, on which my col- leagues may wish to add to or subtract from what is said. These are:
(a) The scope of the prohibition of collective action (paragraph 34 of the draft) and whether it should cover only resale price maintenance as such or extend to all forms of retail price-fixing;
(b) the" discrimination "issue;
(c) the question whether any indication should be given that exemptions for some trades from the effect of the proposed legislation will be considered; (d) the "loss-leader" issue.
The last two of these points are closely bound up with considerations of the reception our proposals are likely to get from the various interests concerned and how far it mageb56expefle to forestall certain of the inevitable criticises 567 of 587
**
427
.
Page 568.