THE PEOPLE'S FRONT
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—Since the People's Front has become a subject of considerable controversy in the Press, I should like to refer to a letter in your issue of last Friday proposing the forma- tion of another organisation, presumably to form the nucleus of a People's Front, or perhaps as the instrument of negotia- tion for one.
I write as one who is associated with a body which has already achieved since before the last General Election a measure of co-operation and joint action on lines, and as I believe, the only lines, along which a Popular Front could be achieved. The Council of Action for Peace and Recon- struction, which has not itself contested any Parliamentary election but has given support to candidates irrespective of party who have signed satisfactorily its questionnaire, has been operating since last July and in the last General Election with widespread effect, and subsequently at all the by- eleetions, in some of which it intervened decisively. It has mobilised support from the progressives of all parties and of none and has demonstrated, which no other inter-party society has done, that such mobilisation can be made elec- torally effective.
In accordance with the principles ern:II:dated by Mr. Delahaye it has given a courageous lead in f 'reign affairs in support of the League and, what is more significant, it issued its statement of policy at a time when the utmost confusion prevailed as to what line ought to be taken in regard to Britain's international obligations.
It has adumbrated a policy of domestic reconstruction and social. justice, drafted by a body of experts of national eminence and of diverse party allegiance, and it is to this statement of policy that candidates for Parliament answering its questionnaire pledged themselves and undertake to use their utmost endeavours .to implement in Parliament on all occasions and to co-operate with members of other parties similarly pledged.
The Council does not deal with ultimate political philosophy, or with those distinctive features of the party programmes which are :not substantially the common property of the progressives in all three- parties.
May I repeat that it is only confusing the effort and dis- distracting the public mind to launch fresh societies with identical objects, when one at least already exists which has achieved an articulate corporate existence, both in the country and in Parliament?—Yours faithfully, CHARLES L. WHITE.
92 Grove Crescent, Kingsbury, N.W. 9.
Previous page
