A SPECTATOR'S NOTEBOOK
THESE Liberal and Conservative manoeuvrings arc a little disturbing to anyone who feels that the country has had enough of the present Government, with all its virtues, and would be the better for a change. It is all very well for the Liberals to proclaim the virgin purity of their independence and the
impossibility of their making any electoral arrangements with anyone
else. They did that in 1945 and as a consequence now hold to seats out of 640 in the Hohse of Commons. That they will do better than this at the next election is pretty certain, but I doubt whether it will be much better if their general attitude towards the other parties is simply "a plague on both your houses." The Liberals cannot really see the issue so nicely balanced as that. They must, if their Liberalism means anything, be opposed to the further deluge of nationalisation to which the Labour Party is com- mitted. They must set their faces against the kind of class-war which sections of the Labour Party seem bent on fomenting. They must view with apprehension the hold the trade unions seem likely to establish over the Labour Party. On the other hand they could accept, I should have thought, practically everything in the Con- servative Right Road for Britain. They can be as confident in Mr Eden's foreign policy as in Mr. &sin's. If so, what follows ? There is a great deal in the demand of Col. Byers, the Liberal Chief Whip, that in certain constituencies now held by Labour the Con- servatives (without anything in the nature of a general national pact) should stand aside for the Liberal if he seems to have the better chance of winning. But that plainly is not enough. It is Lard to see how some kind of general understanding can be avoided. CAinservatives can hardly be expected to stand aside for Liberals anywhere unless there is some ground for being satisfied that such Liberals as arc elected will in the main work with the Conservatives in the House of Commons. But would they, in spite of the strong strain of Liberalism in the Conservative Party today ?
* •* * *
I have great respect for Dr. Garbett as a High Church dig- nitary," said Mr. Shinwell on Saturday, as prelude to a pontifical castigation of His Grace for venturing some observations on the economic state of the country. I have great respect, genuine respect, for Mr. Shinwell as Minister of War or anything else, but platform freedom—or licence—really does carry him away. He objects to the Archbishop making any pronouncements on economics or political policy. Why ? A barrister, a doctor, an engineer, a trade unionist, a manufacturer, may without question discuss either of these topics. If not, the present Chancellor of the Exchequer should be silenced. Is a man of the singularly wide and lengthy experience, and unquestioned intellectual capacity, of Dr. Garbett to have no opinion on such things, or, having one, to refrain scrupulously from disclosing it ? If he thinks the country is in a bad way he thinks what several of His Majesty's Ministers have said with some emphasis (though they achieve an agreeable variety by mingling anodyne assurances with their warnings). If he thinks things arc we than most people realise and that a more general realisation of that is desirable is it not his duty to say so ? But, of course, between the people who criticise the Church for being aloof from the world and the people who criticise it for meddling with public affairs, the Church is never right. It never has been, in some P,,Ples view. That is its predestined fate. I do not often read the Daily Mirror ; it is rather above my head. But picking up a copy somewhere one day this week I noticed an interesting little paragraph to the effect that the editors of the four daily papers in Lausanne had agreed to stop sending reporters to news conferences, which produced little news, but a great deal of self-advertisement or advance publicity for something or the other. I wholeheartedly applaud their decision. There is no doubt that " Press Conferences " in this country arc being exploited to death. Now and then, of course, it is a good thing for an important Minister to talk frankly to the Press, either off the record or for publication, but two-thirds of the Press Conferences I hear of are given by persons who are neither Ministers nor important. Where I see an announcement that Mr. Nobody, M.P., will hold a Press Conference next Tuesday on his return from a political investigation in Sark I marvel that any journalists waste their time in attending. Perhaps they don't. The matter, of course, is in the hands of the News Editors. They might with advantage be much more severely selective. But, no doubt, there is just the chance that Mr. Nobody might say something worth reporting—and what if the Daily Groan got it and the Daily Moan missed it ? * * * * Someone suggests that I ought to display penitence for quoting in this column Church statistics from recognised reference books without taking personal responsibility for them. Not the least bit in the world. I am unfortunately too much occupied to go round counting heads myself. However, I am very glad to add to what I did quote some statistics regarding the Church of Scotland (which is, of course, the Established Church in that country ; the King is an Anglican in England, but a Presbyterian in Scotland) kindly supplied me by the Moderator. In Scotland in 1947 the adult population was 3,488,000, the number of communicant mem- bers, of the Church of Scotland 1,256,167 ; the children born in Scotland numbered 113,147 ; of these 51,103 were baptised in the Church of Scotland. To get the full picture of the Protestant life of Scotland figures for the Episcopal Church, the Methodist, Con- gregationalists and a fcw other bodies are necessary.
* * * * This story will involve me in a good many apologies, including one to someone rather near home. A car-owner was displaying the latest gadget, a set of three extra pushes on his dashboard. " When I press this one," he said, "a loud-speaker in the rear calls out I am turning right.' The other one says I am turning left'." "But what about the one in the middle ? " " Oh, that's for when my wife is driving. It says Guess which way I'm turning '." The politician to whom I owe the story thinks it can come in useful on election platforms. He has already given it a trial run.
* * * *
Though about to call a temporary truce to word-damning I cannot refrain from a final denunciation of one of the most horrible inven- tions of modem journalism, " teenagers." It is bad enough with a hyphen after the teen, but even that is now being discarded. "Teen" itself is fortunately not a recognised word. It is a suffix and nothing but a suffix. Teenagers is almost meaningless, for •t covers anyone from the age of thirteen to the age of nineteen, and between thirteen and nineteen there is little in common. Let it be condemned, blasted and banned. JANUS.
Previous page
