A Spectator's Notebook

0.Speaker Heath? Is it fanciful to suggest that this might be a happy and appropriate role for Mr Heath after Mr Selwyn Lloyd's retirement next year?

No, it is not fanciful. No one in the House of `°Thmons could discharge that grand, historic, sensitive duty with greater distinction. MoreVet the very circumstances of the day, the need in an era dark with foreboding for ational cohesion and co-operation, for fair, InPartial guidance, must surely set him apart as the Speaker most to be desired. He has all the qualities required of the' office; they are (it ,Traght he said) his true natural qualities; and he rsnaS in addition the unique prestige of a former 711ne Minister. If Mr Heath felt able to accept, It Would be a superb appointment — an .FIlpointment by election, by the will of the rtouse in which he is so rightly respected. To any objection that this might not be eLtiough for him, one could observe that it must Lue preferable to remaining on the back 'enches, however exalted his personal stature. sThe SPeakership is one of the highest offices of tate and deserves an incumbent of Mr Heath's CAlibre, , In what proved to be Mr Heath's final general election as leader of the Conservative Party, the.election of October 1974, his theme was GriatIonal unity. He supported the present °vernment in the EEC referendum, just as he "as upheld Mr Wilson's incomes policy. In a :Ilse, Mr Heath is above party: he has become t,rulY national figure of the utmost eminence. h.' he speaker's house in the Palace of :lestrninster, and all the rather splendid t).111.ahgements pertaining to the office, would be re tteh to his taste, one imagines. So would the Presentational aspect abroad — for the maker receives many invitations to cerea °Ilia' occasions in other legislatures and is thsked to address them. Who better to speak for v: Mother of Parliaments than Edward Heath? ”fir_e better to preside over its daily business? gnu witHeath is trusted on both sides of the few se. He enjoys an esteem accorded t.0 very Moreover he wishes to stay in the orTirnons rather than go to the House of Lords pve Parliament altogether. he cannot return to the front bench (he and 's Thatcher are not compatible, nor could he t0 e to dislodge her), he should not be allowed shrsrernain on the back benches. That would be a it (c.king waste of an unusually gifted person. b‘.s In everyone's interest that Mr Heath should seoe restored to proper prominence. The himaker's chair is probably the right place for With retirement, no doubt to the House of h°.111s, the present Speaker will be able to apply hnself to his memoirs, which are already in tr'irld. Mr Selwyn Lloyd has been one of, the \,,,,,c'st agreeable figures in public life for many ;I'Ll4rs, a kindly, considerate, genial and gener rnasr, 111.zan of much personal charm and. a sh ',11nicently good Speaker — fair (but just na°11 of indulgence), never prejudiced or

rlr°w, alvvays understandingly alert to the broader interest. He can — and must — write a good book. • Mr Lloyd has a great collection of papers, diaries and other records, from his years as Foreign Secretary under Eden and Chancellor of the Exchequer with Macmillan. His memoirs (when we see them) should be all the better for exact information recorded at the time, especially on the remaining mysteries of the Suez adventure, to which he was strongly attached — or so it appeared. Mr Lloyd now knows — if he did not divine it at the time — that the Chief Whip of the day, Mr Heath no less, was at heart opposed to Suez, while giving the Prime Minister every outward support that duty required of him; indeed his exertions saved the Eden Government, though Sir Anthony himself fell victim to it all.

Did Mr Lloyd have any reservations of his own — like Mr Heath, like Sir Walter Monckton and like one or two other members of the Government? If not, why not? We wait to hear, in the Selwyn Lloyd memoirs.

0 The theft and recovery of at least some of Mr Wilson's private papers is one of the more bizarre occurrencies of modern public life. Who could be responsible? With what object? This is not America. There are no Watergates here — or so we hope. But strange things do happen even to the highest in the land. When Ramsay MacDonald became the first Labour Prime Minister the Intelligence services, so it is said, tapped his telephone at 10 Downing Street, such was their mistrust of him, firebrand and revolutionary that he seemed.

Worse still, they are believed to have tapped the King's telephone when Edward VIII was carrying on his affair with Mrs Simpson — allegedly at the insistence of Baldwin, the Prime Minister. There is perhaps one person still alive who could vouch for this — but would rather not do so in public.

0 Mr Robert Carr's departure from the Commons is to be regretted, though conversely his arrival in the Lords will be welcomed, and not only by the Conservative peers. He is much respected by members of all parties and was one of the best-liked ministers in Mr Heath's government.

Many were surprised when Mrs Thatcher did not include him in her Shadow Cabinet. However, there might still be a place for him in a future Conservative administration. There is no reason why he should not serve from the Lords when the party is again in office, and every reason why he should. Meanwhile he remains a dependable defender of moderate Conservatism, of the gradualist approach.

It will be interesting to see whether his constituency association at Carshalton choose a successor in the same mould — or move right.

0 What a happy Christmas for William Waldegrave. This fortunate young man has just been selected for Mr Robin Cooke's more or less invincible Conservative seat in Bristol. Many a veteran of elections lost and hopes deferred will be openly envious.

Mr Waldegrave was the head of Mr Heath's private office, and before that a member of Lord Rothschild's so-called 'Think Tank'. Today he is attached to Sir Arnold Weinstock at GEC.

He is clever but not immodest. It can safely be said that he will be a good MP, and in the fullness of time a minister of rank and consequence.

O The streets in London, and elsewhere, have seldom been dirtier in modern times than they are today. Their condition is not a seasonal one, nor is it principally due to inefficiency or contraction in the public services. The fault lies mainly — overwhelmingly — with piivate individuals: we are in danger of becoming a nation of litter louts. While the majority may still be blameless, a growing minority show no regard whatever for public cleanliness.

You can see the evidence everywhere, and not only in streets but in trains and buses as well: discarded wrappings, paper bags and cartons, remnants of food. On a scale previously unknown in this country, more and more people are to be seen eating as they actually walk about, and not just an apple, say, or a bar of chocolate, or an old-fashioned bag of chips, but substantial savouries — hamburgers, fried chicken.

The rapid growth of the so-called take-away food shops has of course encouraged the habit; and to that extent they may be deplored. But the reason for their success is essentially economic: with the cost of living rising all the time, fewer people can afford a meal in a restaurant or even a modest cafe.

Hence, in part, the popularity of take-away establishments. They are providing a service which many have reason to welcome: but we can all regret one of the consequences.