SPECTATOR'S NOTEBOOK
J. W. M. THOMPSON
It seems fair to say that the future shape of local government, after a series of weighty reports from royal commissions and suchlike bodies, is now more uncertain than it ever was. This state of affairs de- lightfully illustrates what can happen when competing teams of experts are set to work, although it is, of course, precisely the oppo- site of what was intended when the great reappraisal began. A question now arises as to how the Government (this one or the next, as the case may be) is to extricate itself from the fog.
For example, the local government needs of England are not wildly unlike those of Scotland: but at present the two countries are being offered completely different structures. Redcliffe-Maud proposes large unitary authorities, with unpaid members, for England; Wheatley wants a two-tier sys- tem, with paid councillors, for Scotland. Meanwhile Wales seems likely to get some- thing in between the two, London is to keep its existing set-up and in the background the Skeffington report is raising a small voice in favour of something called 'com- munity forums'.
It is not going to be easy for any government to argue in favour of all these different systems simultaneously—especially as they are not, after all, the product of public demand but simply the schemes favoured by various different committees. Why, say, should the Scots get sensible two-tier councils (with powers apportioned as the scale of operations require) when we English are to be lumped into vast 'uni- tary authorities'? Such an act of discrimi- nation could well set English nationalism on the march at last. Perhaps the White Paper promised later this year will sort things out a little. Mr Skeffington's speech at Brighton this week certainly didn't.
Gold rush
America's decision to produce a giant rival to the Concorde has some important impli- cations. In the first place, the gap between its operation and that of the Anglo-French plane could well be substantially less than the five years which has been mentioned, given the resources of American industry and the signs of delay already evident with the Concorde. This could make our huge expenditure on this project appear even more misguided than it already does. But more than that, the affair perfectly shows how governments can be chivvied into costly technological enterprises.
The great argument for Concorde, it will be remembered, was that if we didn't build it the Americans would. President Nixon's chief argument, in turn, was that America had to follow suit to 'retain its lead'. No wonder the anti-Concorde lobby looks with suspicion upon some of the American 'op- tions' for Concorde: could they not turn out to be nothing more than a device to put pressure on the us government to spend public money on an American version, to the great profit of the American industry? For even in America, citadel of private enterprise and all the rest of it, the super- sonic plane is only possible, apparently, if the taxpayer is induced to spend lavishly. The value to the industries concerned is staggering. Concorde at present collects £10 million of public money a month for the benefit of its builders; whether it ever goes into service or not, the public will pay them many hundreds of millions which can. not be returned. It is a goldmine—and the expense of the very people who will have to endure its appalling din.
Free for all
The word 'dropout', so much bandied abo at the moment, has acquired the vogue word's usual power to confuse issues. 0 fallacy flourishing on this confusion is notion that the West End squatters we evicted because of some bourgeois sense o outrage at their communal way of lif Such hostility may indeed exist; monk nuns and other groups who adopt distinc tive domestic arrangements sometimes met a certain prejudiced distrust; but it did no land the hippy squatters in trouble. Th law intervened not because they had de tided to opt out of society but becau they had apparently decided to prey upo it: not at all the same thing.
If hippies (or any other sect) wish to in some sort of hostel or even on an islan which they call a commune I don't why there need be the slightest difficult about it. But if they try to pinch someo else's house to do it in, they will certain] run into trouble all over again. There room in our much-abused society, mere fully, for a diversity of tastes, and if o group dislikes earning money so keen] that its members prefer to put up with de pressed living conditions, then that is thet affair. The gypsies, for whom I have Brea sympathy, are not altogether dissimila but although they ought to be allowed pursue their traditional ways without ha assment, that doesn't mean they are the by licensed to steal.
It may be difficult to pay the rent premises in Piccadilly if you object to work ing, of course, but no doubt some fashionable address could be managed.
To fresh woods
Dr Jeremy Bray's resignation from Government to publish a book on mina ment techniques is the most out-of-the-wa resignation episode for a long time, ce tainly since. Mr Attlee lost a junior mini who had decided (understandably enough that he would rather be a mural paint than a politician. One sympathises with Bray's feeling that he ought to be allow to publish his inoffensive work and still a main a minister, but the Whitehall stn of decorum is very strong. At least Dr Be produced a collector's specimen of a re. nation letter, in which he contrived only to quote from Milton's Areopagili at considerable length but also to review h own forthcoming work (`The book thoughtful, and carefully written'-1 the thing for a publisher's advertiseme The great comfort in his departure. Mr Wilson, is that it is hardly likely lead to a large-scale defection. Tut whe fore thou 'alone? Wherefore with thee/Ca not all hell broke loose?' (Also Mill `Paradise Lost'). The answer is that number of ministers who prefer wr books on management techniques to exe ing their own gifts on actual manage is, regrettable as it may be, rather
Previous page
