Labour Party

The inquiry was headed by Clement Attlee, leader of the Labour Party and Lord Privy Seal in the coalition government. He traced the fault to Sir William Brown, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Supply, but wrote that it would not be right to attribute to any one individual the responsibility for failure . Brown kept his job.17... 

One other important point that was mentioned earlier is that the parameters of the state of the system are not necessarily direct perceptions, such as displacement, but may be other measures such as probability. For example, if an opinion poll is taken on a sample of 1,000 people and each person is asked whether they will vote for the Labour Party, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, then the number of states of this system is 3 ° °. As this figure is too high to handle the state description may be replaced by just one state with three parameters of Pi. Pa. Ps. which represent the probability of the population voting Labour, Conservative or Liberal respectively. If this poll were taken many times, it would be repeatably stable in the sense now being discussed, on condition that all the opinions were in favour of either Labour, Conservative or Liberal and no other. In other words, there are repeatably only three parameters for one state. If another party were introduced, or another category such as don t knows into some of the polls and not into others, then the experiment would not be repeatedly stable. 

The interpretations as noted were endorsed by the ministry and possibly also originated from political interference. Rumors had it that the ministry (led by a Labour Party minister) had yielded to strong union pressure. 

When the low status of manufacturing is associated with contempt for wealth creation speakers tend to come from the political Left. Yet given the scale of the Labour Party s 1983 General Election defeat. Labour (and SDP/Liberal thinking) has increasingly begun to focus seriously on wealth creation, rather than on its distribution. 

---