SPECTATOR'S NOTEBOOK
J. W. M. THOMPSON
A difficult point of principle arose when the Prime Minister decided to 'blackball' one of the interviewers proposed for his appearance on the This Week television programme. To what extent should a politician try to control the selection of -those taking part in such a programme? In general, I take it, the answer is that politicians ought not to interfere except in the rarest of circumstances. And in practice, too, it must be said that politicians hardly ever refuse to face a particular questioner (although arguments about the style and content of such a programme are fairly routine). Mr Wil- son, however, is an exception. In the past few years he has at different times blackballed Robert McKenzie, Nigel Lawson, and now Peter Jay.
A Prime Minister is obviously well placed to exercise this sort of influence, since arrange- ments for his appearances are handled by intermediaries, and 'flexible' concessions are therefore easier to arrive at. In addition, iv producers naturally tend to be pleased to have the PM on their programmes even if it means accepting his terms. But it is not in the public interest for any politician to be permitted a secret power of veto over his interviewers. If producers feel that they must on occasion accept such 'a veto, they ought to ensure that details are made public. Politicians, not least Prime Ministers, won't feel happy at having it known that they preferred not to face questions from any particular critic. After all, the essential difference between television and the press is that on television the subject of the interview is present to speak up for himself.
A robust approach is the best one. Someone from the Conservative Central Office once tried to prevent Henry Fairlie being chosen to interview Lord Butler (Fairlie had been writing critical things about the Tory party at the time)
and the producer sensibly appealed to Rab himself. His response was swift and forceful: the official left the scene in discomfort. Equally the television, people ought to remember that robustness pays. Those best placed to know are sure that if Mr Wilson wished to appear on iv (as he unquestionably did in that pro- gramme on devaluation) then, if pressed, he would overcome any displeasure at the presence of a questioner temporarily out of favour. There is an element of bluff in this black- balling business.
Curtains?
The prospects for the National Theatre build- ing once again look dismal. It is, of course, unlucky that the moment of decision on this interminably delayed project should have come at a time of financial crisis. But the Tories of the Greater London Council should think hard about what they are doing before they scotch the scheme yet again. If they decide to do so, they will regret it. One of the Conservatives' handicaps with the educated electorate 'is its reputation for philistinism in the arts. This may be unjust to individuals—Mr Heath is notably not a philistine, for example, and neither are a number of his lieutenants—but it is not unfounded. Look at the performance of one Tory MP this week : Mr Neil Marten and his schoolboy jokes about the new Henry Moore work at Westminster (a churlish response to a gift, incidentally). Labour has been much shrewder in this respect, both in putting Miss Jennie Lee in charge of such matters and also in providing her with generous funds. Obvi- ously the National Theatre decision is difficult, although no actual money will be required for eighteen months. But I think the nix will be wise to decide that even in the days of the devalued pound this is something which can now be, killed only at great cost to the capital's and the nation's self-respect.
Think small
After this week's affair at South Kensington the Tory party really ought to look closely at its methods of selecting candidates. There's something wrong when a man of the stature of Christopher Soames cannot even reach the short list in such a Tory stronghold. Obviously an ex-Cabinet Minister cannot claim special rights, but common sense indicates that Mr Soames was at least worth a place among the four no doubt blameless men from whom the final choice was made. If the possession of a record of service is thought to be a handicap, then the Tory party as a whole is going to suffer. Sir Brandon Rhys Williams, who was in fact chosen to fight the by-election, will for all know make a good MP, but his overwhelming superiority to Mr Soames is not immediately apparent. Peter Paterson, in his recent book The Selectorate, argued for something like the American system of primaries. Another, more modest, change would be for the Tories to em- power their chairman or leader to nominate one person to the short list. At least this would make the locals lift their eyes a little from the parish pump. Unless something of the sort is done, the small men of the local organisations seem likely to create a parliamentary party filled with people cast in their own limited mould.
Times out of joint
Blue skies and a crisp autumnal frost tempted me into a breakfast-time walk on one recent morning. Living in the country has its advan- tages at all seasons. After this enjoyable excur- sion I was not pleased to reflect that at this season next year such morning pleasures will be impossible. 'British Standard Time' (which is perpetual summer time) will mean that next winter, the sun won't rise in early December until nearly nine o'clock. For my part, the gain of an extra hour's daylight while I am in my office at the other end of the day will be poor compensation.
I suspect that this departure from Greenwich mean time is going to be a great deal less popular than its proponents imagine. The number of people who never see their homes by daylight in winter except at weekends will increase sharply, and I foresee dire problems in persuading children to set out for school in freezing darkness. When the Scots grasp the fact that for many of them the sun will not rise in winter until ten o'clock, I can imagine a fresh wave of angry recruits for the Nationalists. Another gross injustice perpe- trated by Westminster! Even after reading Lord Stonham's persuasive speech when the Bill received its second reading the other day, I remain sceptical. (He began : 'Your Lordships will not perhaps recall reading a letter in the SPECTATOR Of 12 October 1907.') The change is meant to harmonise our clock with Europe's. Leaving aside the fact that General de Gaulle has just closed the European door in our face, this seems a footling reason. What is so inconvenient about having different time? In the United States, there are differing times right across a single country, and, as I know from experience, nobody makes the slight- est fuss about it. London businessmen who wish to telephone Europe early in the morning should turn up at their offices an hour earlier, instead of inflicting their problems on everybody else.
Previous page
