SPECTATOR/HIGHLAND PARK AWARDS
Parliamentarian of the Year results
The third annual presentation of the Spectator/Highland Park Parliamentarian of the Year Awards took place on Wednes- day. The awards were presented at a luncheon in the River Room at the Savoy Hotel.
The guests were welcomed by Mr John Goodwin, Managing Director of Highland Distilleries, and by Mr Algy Cluff, Chair- man of the Spectator. The awards — silver quaichs (Scottish drinking vessels) — were presented by last year's Parliamentarian of the Year, Mr John Biffen MP.
The judges of this year's awards were Ferdinand Mount of the Spectator, James Naughtie of the Guardian, Colin Welch of the Daily Mail, Alan Watkins of the Observer, Peter Jenkins of the Sunday Times and Peter Riddell of the Financial Times. Their chairman was Charles Moore, editor of the Spectator, who read out the judges' remarks and citations.
`In parliamentary terms, 1986 was a more exciting year than 1985. This was not because of the importance of legislation undertaken — it was actually a thin year for major Bills — but because of political drama, especially that of the Westland crisis.
`Few of us can now remember, or even understood at the time, exactly what the Westland row was all about, but the crisis which it provoked provided the House of Commons with one of its classic opportuni- ties to make or break political careers and to test the Government. There were re- markable debates, statements and in- terventions. It is natural that some of our awards should concentrate on performance during the Westland affair.
`For the rest, the judges noted with pleasure the continuing vigour of the House of Lords, and with regret the continuing ill-effects in the Commons of too large a majority. It seems at times that the Opposition have despaired of making a mark, so poor is their members' record of attendance at debates. The judges also criticised the abstentionism of most of the Ulster Unionist members.
`Although some categories of award remain fixed from year to year, others vary. The Westland aftermath led us to a new category, Inquisitor of the Year: Dr John Gilbert, MP for Dudley East. Throughout the Select Committee's invest- igation of the Westland crisis, Dr Gilbert kept up the attack. His inquiries were fierce, but not pointlessly hostile, and he admirably fulfilled the role for which select committees are designed — that the legis- lature should arraign the executive. We felt that Dr Gilbert's skills at this sort of thing must have been sharpened by having to undergo a bit of it himself. His outspoken opposition to unilateralism has not made life easy for him in his party.
`Member to Watch: Mr John MacGre- gor, MP for South Norfolk. This award varies in its application. It can be presented to someone very new and young indeed. It may sound odd to offer it to a Cabinet minister. But the judges felt that Par- liamentary reputations are not quite the same as political ones more generally. No one before this year doubted Mr MacGre- gor's competence, but 1986 has revealed Mr John Smith his ability to apply his skill to Parliament. Defending the always difficult Treasury brief, he has displayed a grasp of detail and a coolness under fire. Still more impressive has been his ability to hit back. There have been several occasions when the Opposi- tion have been forced to retire hurt as Mr MacGregor has subjected them to the scrutiny of the Treasury computer and the lashings of his tongue. We feel that he has emerged as a first rank Parliamentary politician in the course of 1986.
`Backbencher of the Year: Mr Roy Jenk- ins, MP for Glasgow Hillhead. With this award, too, there were difficulties. Should we notice the flower that blushes unseen? Should we reward some humble, worthy toiler in the vineyard? No, we thought, we should not. Let us choose someone of the highest class who, even if not a natural backbencher, adds a lustre to those ben- ches. Mr Jenkins has not always found his role below the gangway congenial. Some- times he waves his hands as if unhappy without a dispatch box to put them on. Sometimes he has been disconcerted by the unruly mob sitting just below him. But in 1986, he has brought his full oratorical and intellectual skills to bear on several impor- tant issues. His intervention during West- land was devastating. His speeches in the Budget debate and on the Autumn State- ment were most impressive. In particular, the judges were grateful to him for his refusal to succumb to the prevailing vulgar- ity and his use of language redolent of the grandeur and more refined politics of the past.
`Special Award: Mr Norman St John- Stevas, MP for Chelmsford. This is a unique award. It is not for anything pecul- iar to 1986, but for half a lifetime's parliamentary achievement. Mr St John- Stevas has done two things wrongly thought by many to be incompatible. He has added, in Johnson's phrase, 'to the gaiety of nations', being notable for his wit, charm and style. But he has also been a deeply serious parliamentarian, learned in the history of the House and devoted to its traditions. Like all the best traditionalists, he has been a notable reformer. As Leader of the House, he brought through the much-needed expansion of the select com- mittee system which has so successfully reasserted the influence of Parliament over government. His beloved Bagehot disting- uished between the two parts of the British constitution — Mr St John-Stevas joins them together. He has been dignified and efficient at the same time. He will be greatly missed.
`Parliamentarian of the Year: Mr John Smith, MP for Monklands East. Westland was one of those occasions where the Opposition needs not a cloud of elevated eloquence, but a fund of fierce common- sense. It found it in John Smith, its trade and industry spokesman. Instead of gener- alised denunciations of the Government, Mr Smith preferred chapter and verse. With his lawyer's acumen and his Scottish bluntness, he harried the Government through its disasters and used his victories to further later campaigns. Westland, Austin-Rover, Land-Rover — if Mr Smith were a regiment, these names would be emblazoned on his colours. He knows when to press on and, even more difficult, when to stop. He displays good nature without weakness and good speaking with- out frills. The judges had no difficulty in agreeing that his was the outstanding par- liamentary achievement of the year.
`In closing, the judges want to emphasis again that their awards do not claim any superior authority. They are offered only in respect and affection for the Houses of Parliament.'
Previous page
