26 FEBRUARY 1977, Page 4

Political Commentary

Breath-taking gamble

John Grigg

Mr Callaghan's appointment of David Owen to succeed Tony Crosland as foreign secretary is the boldest act of his premiership. At a time of multiple difficulty and peril for the Government it has enabled him to regain the psychological initiative. But its effect upon the inner dynamics of the Labour Party is incalculable.

Naturally enough, people have been comparing the appointment with that of Anthony Eden in 1935. But a more significant analogy is, surely, the appointment of Hugh Gaitskell to the Exchequer in 1950. Then as now a Labour government was in office with a precarious parliamentary majority. Then as now a relatively youthful and unknown man was promoted over the heads of Cabinet ministers who saw themselves as potential leaders of the party. Soon afterwards, and as a direct consequence, Aneurin Bevan and Harold Wilson resigned, so that the left acquired formidable leadership. (The fact that neither was a genuine left-winger, least of all Wilson, is neither here nor there.) The risk that Mr Callaghan has taken in appointing Dr Owen to the top flight of government over the head, more especially, of Mr Benn has certainly not been taken in ignorance of what happened • twenty-five years ago. The prime minister knows that he may have made the last, decisive move towards precipitating civil war within the party, or even towards producing the fundamental realignment which has been so much discussed in recent years. Perhaps he has come to the conclusion that outright war would be preferable to the existing state of affairs, which threatens disaster to the Government's credit in more senses than one.

It seems more likely, however, that he believes that he can call the bluff of the left, and of those who might be tempted to lead it. After all, Mr Benn can see how little good the Bevanite split did to Bevan. True, the trade unions were then firmly on the side of moderation, and the general economic climate favoured Butskellism.' But even in the present very different circumstances Mr Benn would probably be taking a bigger gamble by resigning than Mr Callaghan has taken by appointing Dr Owen.

What of the man himself? Does he deserve the astonishing chance he has been given? Readers of this commentary may remember that last June, while lamenting the dearth of youthful talent in Parliament today, I mentioned him as the most conspicuous exception on the Labour side, and also pointed to his courage in supporting Roy Jenkins. Courage is vital for a political leader, and Owen undoubtedly showed it in 1972, when he resigned, with Jenkins, from the Labour front bench on the Common Market issue.

Of course he is ambitious, but ambition, as Macaulay said, is 'in the best people half a virtue.' And the test of their virtue is whether or not they are prepared to jeopardise their careers for a good cause. The ambition to beware of is that which restrains a man or woman from ever leaving the safe high-road, Dr Owen would have been in good company if he had stayed put in 1972, but to his very considerable honour he went into the wilderness with Mr Jenkins. (This is not to say that all pro-Market Labour front-benchers who did not resign acted scurvily, because there was room for honest disagreement on the specific issue of the referendum.) Dr Owen's qualifications for ultimate leadership of his party are, in one sense, greater than Anthony Eden's ever were. Whereas Eden came to the premiership without any ministerial experience in the domestic sphere, Owen has served in the important post of health minister, as well as in defence and foreign affairs. He is beyond question an all:rounder. What he lacks is a strong base within the party.

His future depends, obviously, upon his performance as foreign secretary. Is he the right man for that particular job ? As yet he is no sort of a linguist, though since becoming minister of state he has been working hard to improve his schoolboy French. But linguistic ability, though extremely valuable, is not indispensable in diplomacy. Owen has quick wits, pleasant manners and a fair amount of Celtic intuition. Moreover, he and his beautiful wife (who, incidentally, speaks French well) are likely to arouse interest and curiosity in foreign capitals. Glamour is a dangerous asset, but an asset none the less.

Since Mrs Owen is American, his links with the United States are specially close, and he has also travelled in Latin America. But Africa, where he has a very troublesome piece of unfinished business to handle, is virtually a closed book to him. His outstanding qualification is for dealing with the European Community, because his faith in it has been proved the hard way and should ensure at least the initial goodwill of our partners. It is also, on balance, helpful that he and the President of the Commission are such friends.

As a young man in a post supposedly requiring exceptional gravitas, he will have to be careful not to cultivate it in such a way as to fall into the trap of appearing pompous. Many will be watching with jaundiced eyes for any sign that he is either a lightweight or

a man weighed down with his own selfimportance. To avoid one or the other charge he will need to show remarkable judgment and tact—which are anyway qualities essential in a foreign minister.

If he is a success, Labour will regain much of the sparkle that it has been steadily losing, but only if the Government as 2t whole is successfUl. He alone cannot save it Yet by seeming to bring a new generation forward to redeem the failures of the old, Mr Callaghan has scored a distinct point. He has also scored a point against the left by enticing Judith Hart back into the Government on his own terms. But his problems are legion, and if he manages to postpone an election until the autumn of next year he will have achieved something not far short of a political miracle.

The fate of the Government will be determined by economics rather than by foreign affairs, and it may well be argued that the retention of Mr Healey as Chancellor offsets the novelty and excitement of Dr Owen's promotion. Mr Healey has been a calamitous Chancellor, and when he makes euphoric statements about the economYas he did, once again, at the beginning of this month—the whole world knows that trouble is coming. Though he can claim to have tightened control of the money supply, in other respects his record on inflation has been appalling. Throughout 1974 he allowed it to gather momentum, and during the second election of that year he misled the public about it so grossly that almost any other man would have felt obliged to resign when the truth became apparent. Last year his maladroitness of word and deed had much to do with the collapse of the pound, which in turn is a major cause of the present alarming rise in the inflation rate. It is very doubtful if he is the right man to negotiate another pay deal with the unions. Last year he made the serious mistake of laying down a precise figure before negotiations began and then not sticking to it precisely, with the result that foreign opinion was far less impressed than it might otherwise have been by the terms eventuallY agreed. This year it will be vastly trore, difficult to obtain an agreement of any kin°' and a new Chancellor would probably have been as welcome to the unions as to foreign holders of sterling. If it had been possible for Mr Callaghan to send Shirley Williams or Peter Shore to the Treasury withc,,..j. denying himself the chance to appoint lir Owen, the Government would now be less acutely vulnerable and would have a reallY new look. But what could he then have done with Mr Healey ? One last word about Dr Owen. Should he ever become prime minister he would be he first medical man to attain the position in Britain. But in France there is a notable. precedent in the shape of Clemenceau, and in Rhodesia the long-serving Huggins (Lord Malvern) was originally a doctor. Can anyone think of others NO° have made the same transition ?