BOOKS
Ientered the House of Commons in 1961. For just over a year I saw Hugh Gaitskell demonstrate his formidable skills as Opposition Leader. Then death cut short his career. He has since become a legend for social democracy. This is hardly surprising. Subsequent years have pro- vided Labour with a lean harvest of heroes when enjoying the fruits of office. The years in opposition have been sterile and faction-ridden.
Sixty years ago Hugh Gaitskell was appointed to the Department of Adult Education at the University College, Not- tingham. Politics and Consensus in Modern Britain marks that occasion. It consists of essays first given as Gaitskell Lectures, and also some commentaries upon them. The list of authors is impressive. A number of essays, particularly that of Lord Jenkins, dwell upon the personality and policies of Gaitskell. Others bear upon such central political issues as Northern Ireland, the Trade Unions and the European Commun- ity. The book as a whole is a pleasing blend of personal assessments of Gaitskell and other topical issues. It is a mixture of the man and other matters.
Gaitskell is accounted by all the contri- butors to have been a politician of out- standing integrity. Presumably this was so, although Michael Heseltine has doubts about the straightforwardness of Gaits- kell's scepticism towards the European Community. 'He took a decision suited to the internal conflict within the Labour Party.' Alas we shall never know; but I judge Gaitskell would have been appalled at Heseltine's enthusiasm for a Europe of economic corporate giants.
Gaitskell's rectitude did not make him an unbearably difficult companion forever dwelling upon his conscience. He had a lively appetite for power; well ordered objectives; and the ability to collect de- voted followers. These qualities were nev- er to be tested by premiership. It is a fair guess, however, that they would have made him an active Prime Minister. He would have been Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive. He would have had the temperament and the drive to recruit his own cadre of advisers. A fistful of pebbles would have disturbed the water of Whitehall. It is particularly appropriate that two of the essayists, Lord Beloff and Lady Blackstone contribute on the institu- tions of government. Both indicate, but not explicitly, how Gaitskell as Prime Minister would have had available far greater means of personal power than had been wielded by Macmillan or Eden. I believe he would have used them. Regret-
Example of the lost leader
John Biffen
POLITICS AND CONSENSUS IN MODERN BRITAIN: LECTURES IN MEMORY OF HUGH GAITSKELL edited by W. John Morgan Macmillan Press, £29.50, £12.95, pp.221 fully these matters must remain solely for speculation.
Inevitably, such a book, with authors including David Owen, Anthony Crosland and Roy Jenkins, will be studied for its relevance to the current problems of the Labour Party. Neil Kinnock does not invite formal comparison with Hugh Gaitskell and he has a more daunting challenge. He is — like Gaitskell — wrestling with the left wing of his party. He is seeking a new rhetoric to describe Labour economic poli- cies that are tentatively adjusting to the social market philosophy of modern Tory- ism.
Gaitskell never feared the frontal assault when he disagreed with his opponents. His dignified oratory in defeat, 'fight, fight and fight again for the Party we love,' still echoes down the years. The defiance brought Gaitskell early triumph. It chal- lenges Neil Kinnock to secure his reformist victory with robust language. The words must not underplay the deed.
The analogy for Labour between the late 1950s and the late 1980s is only partial. Nonetheless, on both occasions successive election defeats have undermined the coherence and credibility of the Labour 'It helps me to count my blessings.' Party. It has become an easy prey to faction. Leadership has to be asserted. It must indicate Labour's ambition for office rather than the narcissistic pleasures of opposition. Roy Jenkins and David Owen are both eloquent in their praise of the tenacity and integrity with which Gaitskell confronted his party with the need to revise its traditional philosophy. Above all, he did not pursue his ends by some subtle Fabian technique, turning the odd flank and avoiding battle unless victory was certain. Gaitskell gathered his cadre of supporters and fought so doggedly and openly that no one could doubt his objec- tives or the Labour reforms he sought.
The task facing Neil Kinnock is no less formidable. The Kinnock reforms are de- signed to take Labour back towards the mainstream of British politics. His objec- tive can best be seen where he has greatest direct authority — namely in the composi- tion of the Labour front bench. Labour has assembled a perfectly competent 'govern- ment in exile' — give them Rover motor cars, a private office apiece, and you will have a ministerial team talking the lan- guage of 'socialist market economics'. Kin- nock knows, however, he cannot so easily mould the trade unions, many wayward backbench MPs, and the constituency asso- ciations in the image of his Shadow Cabinet. He has to nurse and nudge. In his position he has little alternative. On the other hand the oblique approach has a terrifying risk: victory over the left could pass unperceived and unmerited. Kinnock must not only win: he must be seen to have won. That is the message bequeathed by Gaitskell's conduct.
Apart from Gaitskell, there is the bonus of a number of essays on general political topics. Two deserve particular attention. Pre-eminent is Anthony Crosland's elegant defence of indicative planning as a means of promoting economic expansion. It re- tains its challenge although events and economic fashion have dated it.
Secondly, Merlyn Rees has contributed a succinct analysis of the problems of Northern Ireland. He establishes the in- tractable nature of the problem in an authoritative and wholly depressing man- ner. The essay should be required reading for any British politician nurturing 'an initiative'.
Notwithstanding the quality of these essays, Politics and Consensus in Modern Britain will continue to be valued primarily for the understanding it shows of Hugh Gaitskell, and indirectly of the problems of the present Labour leadership. It is the topic of the hour.
Previous page
