A SPECTATOR 'S NOTEBOOK
IHAVE found real and general appreciation of the Queen's broad- cast on Sunday night, and heard more than one comment on the youthfulness of the voice. There was no doubt about its clear- ness ; every word told ; if anything, the early part of the talk was a little on the slow side. The good broadcaster naturally tends that way as a reaction against the bad broadcaster who goes too fast. The Queen made it clear in her first paragraph that she had some- thing very definite on her mind to say. What was it? Part of it, clearly, was an expression of deep appreciation of what the women of England are doing. Perhaps that was the major theme. But more striking in many ways was the aote of deep conviction which marked the closing passages of the broadcast, with their declaration of unquestioning belief " that it is on the strength of our spiritual life that the right re-building of our national life depends," and that " it is the creative and dynamic power of Christianity which can help us to carry the moral responsibilities which history is placing on our shoulders." The whole of this part of the Queen's broadcast seems to me very notable. It was no part of her principal message, in the sense that her principal message would have seemed quite complete without it. The whole point is that to the Queen it would not have been complete without that simple and impressive declara- tion of personal faith. I cannot recall any comparable affirmation from such a quarter. The Queen added, it will be recalled, that she and the King were grateful to think that they and their family were remembered in their people's prayers. Next week Princess Elizabeth reaches her seventeenth birthday. The prayer for the Royal Family, which mentions the Princess by name, is by no means always said in the morning and evening services of the Church of England. Its use on this coming Sunday will, I should hope, be general.
* * * * The broadcasting of the proceedings of the House of Commons, or for that matter of both Houses, is an old idea, but Lord Hinching- brooke, who has an established position among younger Conserva- tives, gave it new currency in last week's debate on the B.B.C., pressing very strongly that steps in that direction should be taken. The first comment that suggests itself is that the difficulties are great and the demand small. Is there, indeed, any demand at all? Many M.P.s, it seems, would like to be broadcast, but that, it may be suggested, is not the point. The question is whether the country generally has any desire to listen to an ordinary debate in the House of Commons. Assuming that it has, how is the thing to be arranged? The proceedings of the House in peace-time normally last for over eight hours every sitting-day. Is Parliament to monopolise a wave-length for that period daily? Or are the pro- ceedings to be edited, some Members being reported at length, some cut to a shred, some ignored altogether? I should be rather sorry for the Minister answerable for the B.B.C. at question-time in such a case. But Lord Hinchingbrooke was thinking of war- time conditions and, realising that few listeners would be free to give adequate attention to their legislators during the actual sitting, he suggested that the speeches should be recorded and served out " at appropriate times." That, no doubt, would be technically possible, but, again, what audience could Lord Hinchingbrooke guarantee for the orators of Westminster in competition with Itma or even the Brains Trust? Fit, though few, he might reply. More few than fit, I should fear.
A letter from Lord Mamhead in Wednesday's Times draws attention to one of those little human hardships which so often go unremedied because the public generally has no knowledge of them. Many inmates of Public Assistance Institutions, generally there from no fault at all of their own, are, says Lord Mamhead, without a penny to buy an occasional newspaper with, much less twopence-halfpenny to write once in a way to a friend or relative, and if they happen to be under 65 the local authorities are precluded from doing anything for them ; when the Devon Public Assistance Committee desired to provide pocket-money at the rate of Is. a week, it was over-ruled by the Ministry of Health. Complete and utter pennilessness is not easily imaginable by most of us. What the Devon Public Assistance Committee wanted to do was obviously the right and humane course, and the Ministry of Health might well be exhorted to think again. But failing that, here surely is an oppor- tunity for private goodwill. It should be easy to raise a small pocket-money fund, and keep it regularly fed, in every public assistance area if only the right person .took the matter up and the case were persuasively put.
Who is the Commander-in-Chief Home Fleet? I am not asking for information, but to suggest that readers should put the question to themselves. I doubt if one in ten could answer it, though in fact his appointment, in succession to Sir John Tovey, was announced in all the papers less than a month ago. Why are we so regardless of one of the half-dozen mcn who holds the safety of this island in his hands? No one had any doubt about who was in charge of the North Sea in the last war. Jellicoe and Beatty were as familiar names as French and Haig. It is partly, I suppose, that the German fleet is not the same danger today as it was then, and also that some .of the other commands—notably the Mediterranean—are of relatively greater importance (for Italy and Japan were our allies then). All the same, our sense of debt to Sir John Tovey till a few weeks ago, and to Sir Bruce Fraser now, ought not to go unregistered entirely.
* * * *
Governments, to do them justice, are often at a disadvantage in relation to their critics through not being- able, for a variety of perfectly good reasons, to state publicly all the considerations that have led them to take a particular course. That, of course, is specially true in war-time, and it applies, among other cases, to the action taken in respect of the shares in Messrs. Short Brothers. From all I hear, the Government was abundantly justified in taking over the shares in this concern, and if it felt able to make a full explanation of its action—which it must be admitted it cannot—no one would doubt that it took the right course in the public interest.
* *
One other point from the debate on the B.B.C. (Pertinacity in the scrutiny of Hansard does sometimes yield reward.) Mr. Brendan Bracken made a remark that may have been made before, but has the merit of presenting a fundamental truth from a new angle. " I doubt," he said, " whether there is any Member of Parliament who will challenge the freedom of the Press, because they know that the freedom of the Press is a right of the public and not of the Press." That is worth reflecting on—by the public.
jANUS.
Previous page
