Neon Vs Radio: The 1939 Commons Debate

Britain’s Pre-War Glow Problem

On paper it reads like satire: on the eve of the Second World War, the House of Commons was debating glowing shopfronts.

Mr. Gallacher, an MP with a sharp tongue, rose to challenge the government. Were neon installations scrambling the airwaves?

The answer was astonishing for the time: around a thousand complaints in 1938 alone.

Picture it: ordinary families huddled around a crackling set, desperate for dance music or speeches from the King, only to hear static and buzzing from the local cinema’s neon sign.

Major Tryon confessed the problem was real. The snag was this: there was no law compelling interference suppression.

He spoke of a possible new Wireless Telegraphy Bill, but stressed that the problem was "complex".

Translation? Parliament was stalling.

Gallacher pressed harder. People were paying licence fees, he argued, and they deserved a clear signal.

Mr. Poole piled in too. What about the Central Electricity Board and their high-tension cables?

The Postmaster-General ducked the blow, basically admitting the whole electrical age was interfering with itself.

---

From today’s vantage, it feels rich with irony. Back then, neon was the tech menace keeping people up at night.

Jump ahead eight decades and the roles have flipped: the once-feared glow is now the heritage art form begging for protection.

---

Why does it matter?

First: neon has always rattled cages. It’s always pitted artisans against technology.

In truth, it’s been art all along.

---

The Smithers View. We see the glow that wouldn’t be ignored.

That old debate shows neon has always mattered. And it still does.

---

Ignore the buzzwords of "LED neon". Glass and gas are the original and the best.

If creative neon signs London ideas could shake Westminster before the war, it can certainly shake your walls now.

Choose glow.

You need it.

---