Politics
Nil desperandum
Minister without Portfolio, David Young (tni1)."Paymaster General, John Gummer (Mil)'. Thus the Times on two of Mrs Thatcher's new appointments. One can imagine these statements read out in the slow, dull voice reserved for football results — 'Heart of Midlothian: 2, Hamil- ton Academicals: 1' — and it is in a similarly unenthused spirit that most peo- ple seem to be taking the latest reshuffle. 'Reshuffle' indeed is a better word than usual, because Mrs Thatcher has not called for a new pack. As she made clear, the changes were wished on her by Mr James Prior; she never intended to start shifting people so early on, and so no one has much right to complain about the lack of novelty and excitement.
That word `nil' emphasises the cautious nature of the whole enterprise. When Mr Gummer was at the Department of Em- ployment and Chairman of the Conserva- tive party, Labour politicians loved point- ing out that he was drawing a ministerial salary for his party work. Mrs Thatcher seems tacitly to have accepted this argu- ment and arranged for the Conservatives to pay Mr Gummer his money (Mr Parkin- son. when in the same position, received Government money); at the same time, she has given Mr Gummer a sinecure without its customary accompaniment of a place in the Cabinet. It all looks a little apologetic.
Then there is Mr Young. His salary really will be nil, on the grounds that he is 'a man of independent means'. Are we to expect men like Mr Peter Walker and Mr Michael Heseltine, whose means are ex- traordinarily independent, to follow suit? Clearly not. The future Lord Young is now that curious thing, a non-political Cabinet minister. Although familiar in America, that way of doing things is thought to sit uncomfortably with British Parliamentary habits, and so its beneficiaries have to be on their best behaviour.
This case is particularly delicate. Mr Young is a Jew from Finchley. Finchley is Mrs Thatcher's constituency, and it is one of the few in Britain where the Jewish vote is decisive. Mrs Thatcher has also made his brother, Stuart, the Chairman of the BBC. It says much for Mr Young, and something for Mrs Thatcher, that few think that there is anything very fishy in his elevation. We would not have been so understanding about a similar series of moves by Harold Wilson. The fact is that Mr Young is one of those annoying people who is admired by everyone who works with him; and he is said to 'care' about unemployment without allowing that care to be a substitute for action and thought.
It is not obvious, of course, that Mr Young's abounding virtue will see him successfully through his new job. Politi- cians, who have had to struggle through years of uncertainty and adversity, tend to resent or disregard those who have never been roughed and tumbled by politics. And although Mr Young is not, in a derogatory sense, Mrs Thatcher's creature, he owes his position entirely to her. Earlier this year, there was talk of making him her Downing St chief of staff, a move which was blocked by the civil service. If his Cabinet post is a sort of substitute, it rather emphasises his client status. If you like saying that the Prime Minister loves to surround herself with yes-men, you will say it in the case of Mr Young.
But might there not be something in the opposite argument — that Mr Young's appointment represents a rare effort at genuine Cabinet government? He is on good terms with all the ministers con- cerned with employment, industry and training, especially with Sir Keith Joseph and Mr Norman Tebbit. He will not be encumbered with the weight of his own department automatically resisting the sug- gestions of its rivals. The main purpose of his job will be to coordinate policy so that all those concerned do not contradict one another's efforts to relieve unemployment. He can only succeed to the extent that he can get his colleagues to cooperate.
Which could not be more different from Mr Douglas Hurd's job. The Northern Ireland Secretary, since he was invented in 1972, has always been modelled on a Roman procurator, the only difference being that he is expected to deluge his province with money instead of plundering it to enrich himself. He acts alone, and the quid pro quo which he demands for his exile is that he should be allowed to act independently. With the departure of Mr Prior, Mrs Thatcher had the opportunity to relieve this isolation and integrate the running of Northern Ireland with the poli- cies of the entire Government.
Instead she has appointed Mr Hurd, who is the model whom the Army and Navy Stores, in its golden days, would have chosen to illustrate in thek catalogue for 'Colonial administrator: first class'. Tall, thin, brainy, coolly polite, distinguished grey hair, would look dignified in plumed hat, calculated to impress the natives . . . As has been said in this column before, the natives of Northern Ireland have a habit of being unimpressed and irritated by this sort of thing; but Mrs Thatcher has even thought of that. She has sent them Dr Rhodes Boyson as well to annoy them in a new and quite different way,Dr Boyson can be expected to supply all the rhetoric in which Mr Hurd is too fastidious to indulge; yet what is actually needed as the Minister of State in a department which is supposed to cover the whole range of ordinary departmental responsibilities is a rather quiet sort of chap who works very, very hard.
But lest the sin of despair should be tempting those who take an interest in Government policy towards Northern Ire- land, one should point out that Mr Hurd. though impeccably Wet by instinct is, and has been chosen as, 'a safe pair of hands'. Unlike Mr Prior, he has been promoted to the post and has never been in the Cabinet . before. He will be keen to impress the Prime Minister, not to satisfy a personal constituency of potential rebels looking for leadership. There is no such thing as a Hurdite, and no sign than Mr Hurd is vain enough to wish that there were.
Mr Hurd has been careful with his promises. He has undertaken to 'listen' to people for a few weeks — something which all Northern Ireland Secretaries and no other Cabinet ministers feel that they have to do — and even when he has stopped listening to people, he signals no intention of doing anything in the least dramatic. 'I will build on what Jim Prior has done,' Mr Hurd says. When Mr Prior arrived, he did not say that he intended to build on what Humphrey Atkins had done. Rather, after the statutory period of listening, he laun- ched an initiative, less disastrous, because more tentative, but just as unsuccessful, as any that preceded it. If Mr Hurd means anything by his first cautious remarks, he means that something rather quiet and careful is contemplated. If he turns out to be a Tory Roy Mason in Ulster (minus' one hopes, the De Loreans), he will have done well by the province. Mr Prior's presence in Ulster has coin- cided with Mrs Thatcher's distancing of herself from the problem. Since her unhap- py experience of Mr Charles Haughey s unique charm at the summit in 1980, she has become more careful about encourag- ing any grand notions of future unity- 'Pooling of sovereignty' (how can you pool that sort of thing?) is an idea which Mr Nicholas Scott airs on the television, not something which Mrs Thatcher entertains. But now that Mr Prior has gone, and with him the need to give a potential rival a wide berth, Mrs Thatcher may be tempted to take a closer interest once more in Irish matters, enticed by the famous honesty of Dr Garret Fitzgerald, which is far more confusing and demoralising to Englishmen than any amount of Mr Haughey. If there are initiatives and forums on offer. Mr Hurd will be happy to help with them, but he will not conjure new ideas out of the air and speak his mind so spontaneously and erratically as Mr Prior; which is a pity for political commentators, if not. perhaps, for Ulster.
Charles Moore
Previous page
