Westminster Commentary
LABOUR'S campaign against the H-bomb tests (if it is a campaign against the H-bomb tests, and a liberal examina- tion of tea-leaves and entrails has so far proved quite useless, as far as I am concerned, to make any sense at all of any Labour pronouncement on the subject bar those of the pacifists, who don't want the thing and say so) is one more example of their failure to pick an issue on which the Government can be successfully met in the country, which has, after all, the last word. It is, for instance, no use the Parliamentary Labour Party demonstrating to my satisfaction, as they did on Monday, that Mr. Ian Harvey, Joint Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, is a bonehead of such propor- tions that he makes Dr. Hill look like an intel- lectual; for in the first place I knew it already, and in the second Mr. Harvey could stand at the Box and recite the multiplication table in Urdu for all the effect it would have on the electorate at large, most of whom, if they got to hear of the incident at all, would judge it a welcome relief from Mr. Selwyn Lloyd's usual performance.
If the Labour Party win the next General Elecs- tion, assuming that no new major issues come into existence before it takes place, they will not do so by asking a dozen questions a day about the bomb tests, not even if Mr. Gaitskell stops looking pink, sour and cross-eyed when Mr. Bevan gets up to ask one before his Leader has been heard from. They will do it by convincing the electorate that they can (and, more important, will) make a genuine attack on the cost of living, that they will stop nationalising other people's property (1 should have thought that if any decision of the Great British Public had been expressed clearly enough to penetrate even the heads of the Shadow Cabinet it was that the GBP is heartily sick and tired of that particular Experiment Noble), that they can do better than the Conservatives when it comes to housing (they put Mr. Mitchison up to lead the attack on the Rent Bill; I ask you!), and that they will not further increase taxation or further reduce the specific gravity of beer. If foreign affairs come into the picture at all it will probably be via a demand to Mr. Gaitskell for an assurance that if we are to be blessed with Mr. Bevan as Foreign Secretary we will at least be spared Mr. Mikardo as his Minister of State. As a matter of fact, if Mr. Gaitskell really wants me to tell him how to win an election—an unlikely contingency—I am perfectly willing to do so. Let him take the head of Brother Padley—a formid- able weapon, in all conscience—and use it to beat some sense into the Co-operative Party. Then let him launch an attack on that crawling horror, the Shops Bill. The customers will do the rest, and the USDAW may go and take a running jump at itself.
But, no; Brother Padley wields a million votes and more at conference-time, and so Mr. Gait- skell, instead of leaving Mr. Bevan to paddle slowly up the creek with the H-bomb tests, insists on joining in, day after day, while rich opportunities for carnage lie untouched before his very eyes. What has been the sole topic of conversation in every saloon bar in the land for the last six months? Dr. Adams. Then why did Mr. Gaitskell leave the command of the vanguard, when it came to throwing some light on the Government- prosecution part in that business, to an amiable wheelhorse like Mr. Wigg? Search me.
But I collect myself with the thought that you could so far have searched me in vain for any mention of what has actually been going on at Westminster. Well, the Finance Bill received its second reading on Tuesday without a division; Professor Powell, moving same, began so hoarsely that I expected him at any moment to murmur 'Qualls aril fex pered and fall dead at Mr. Thorneycroft's feet; he soon recovered, however, and gave the House yet another commanding per- formance, picking his way deliberately, for pity of his back benches, between the ugly crags of technicality. What Mr. Powell, who is not only an intellectual but a gentleman, is doing in a game like British party politics is quite beyond my understanding. Mr. Gordon Walker replied.
But it was Mr. Harvey, answering for the Foreign Office on Monday, that supplied the pen- cillers with the ham for their sandwich. When some Ministers are out of their depth—Mr. Ward, for instance, or Mr. Hare—they behave exactly like a puppy that is trying to climb a flight of stairs and repeatedly falling down : that is, they constantly look round, wagging their tails, quite aware that they are making idiots of themselves but willing to do so for the sympathetic laughter and cries of `Isn't he sweet!' that invariably follow. Mr. Harvey, however, merely growls, shakes his ears, and starts the hopeless climb all over again, thus leading many a stern voice to say, 'We shall have to have that creature put to sleep.' Taking leave of my metaphor, let me quote a remark or two that fell from his lips. Any Minis- ter who has not yet learnt that questions from Mr. Emrys Hughes must be treated with the utmost care, since they invariably contain a great deal of high-explosive and a very delicate fuse, deserves everything he gets. What Mr. Harvey got was the following : MR. Huums: Have Her Majesty's Govern- ment warned the American Government that if there is an unnecessary display of armed force in this area oil pipelines may be cut again?
MR. HARVEY: There is no necessity for Her Majesty's Government to tender such obvious advice to anybody.
MR. BEVAN: Since when has it been obvious to Her Majesty's Government that a display of armed force might result in the cutting of a pipe- line?
And do you know what he said to that? Pudding- voiced, he replied, `That is another question,' a remark which he made, in various forms, eight times before he was finished, until Labour mem- bers were chanting 'That is another question' whenever he got up to reply to a supplementary, much as they now chant, `He said, she said,' when- ever they catch sight of Mr. Brooke. So there are only two questions to be answered : one is the obvious one (to which the answer is that, believe it or not, he is no worse than any available alterna- tive, and better than some) and the other is the minor, but intriguing, mystery of who supplied Mr. Harvey with the retort discourteous that he finally hurled at Mr. Morrison, planting the barb deep in the hide of Old Man Quiff. 'With the deepest respect to the right hon. Gentleman,' said Mr. Harvey, 'I think that it is unwise for him to refer to anybody's experience as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.'
TAPER
Previous page
