9
And now, an Election Broadcast . • •
DON'T suppose you're any keener than I am to lhave another general election less than eighteen months after the last one. Quite frankly, I've been far too busy governing the country and discussing our national problems with the good folk of Coronation Street—so happily named in honour of Her Majesty the Queen— to worry about electioneering. And, heaven I/ knows, we've had enough of that these past two and a half years. You know, only ten days before the dissolution of Parliament, I made it clear that there would be no election until we had finished our programme. Yet in a desperate attempt to paper over the squalid splits in their divided leadership, our opponents have irrespon- sibly forced an election on us.
Well, they can have their election. And I say this to them, too, without fear or favour: let them, if they have the guts, take part in a great national debate. But let .us be clear about one thing. I hope nobody's going to be so unpatriotic as to bring sterling into this elec- tion. Or the economy, for that matter. Sterling and the economic power of Britain should be above the party battle and the squalor of Con- servative party manoeuvring. That goes for the trade unions, too. Quite honestly, I deplore as much as anyone the goings-on that some sections of the Tory press would like us to believe occurred at Cowley. I only hope that our opponents will not sink so low as to try and make party capital out of the personal suffering of a handful of men. For a hundred years our great trade union movement has been above party politics, and that is where all decent people want it to stay.
Even greater harm—and I must be frank about this—is now being done by the Tories' deter- mination to bring Rhodesia into this election. By publicly—and treasonably—attacking the Government's policy they are giving aid and comfort to those who have rebelled against Her Majesty the Queen, and they are doing it for party reasons. This is irresponsibility almost without parallel in the history of our country. And now they're trying to bring Europe into the election, too. Our position on Europe is clear. We are ready to join the European Eco- nomic Community on two conditions. First, it must involve no changes in any of our tradi- tional arrangements, political or commercial, agricultural or industrial. And second, the foreigners we agree to join must, for their part, agree to swear allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen. I will be frank with you: the negotiations will be tough. My own experience of negotia- tions goes back twenty years. When I was at the Board of Trade we had some pretty tough negotiations with the Russians. But by publicly making Europe an issue at this election, our opponents are unpatriotically trying to weaken Britain's negotiating position for party advantage.
Above all, I hope nobody's .going to bring politics into this election. There are already signs of it. Let me warn them that if they do the British people will know what to do with them. There is only one real issue at this elec- tion. It is whether this country is to have a government, and a government that governs. You may not agree with what we have done. But most of you will agree that we have been a Government. This is the great difference between us and our opponents. Not once, during the whole of the past seventeen months, have the Conservatives governed. We have.
And whatever decisions have had to be taken, popular or unpopular, however tough and how- ever contrary to our election pledges, we have taken without fear or favour and regardless of votes. Heaven knows, some of the decisions have been tough, hard and unpopular—like removing prescription charges, increasing pensions, reduc- ing the rate burden, and offering cheap mort- gages. Yet all of these we have done, and we have not been afraid to face the political un- popularity of having to increase taxation on capital gains, expense-accounts spivs and on the rich to pay for it.
And, you know, every step that we've 'taken has been bitterly opposed by our opponents. Quite frankly, politicians who were respon- sible for thirteen wasted years culminating in an f800 million deficit and who now have the impertinence to criticise us for wasting only seventeen months—quite frankly, these sort of people are beneath contempt. Of course, we've had to take some tough, hard and unpopular measures. But, you know, this hasn't been the old stop-go. It's true there has been a purposive stabilisation of production. But unemployment is lower today than for ten years. That is why earnings have been going up faster than ever before-9 per cent last year. Our opponents, for cheap party advantage, have been attacking us for allowing wages and earnings to rise so fast. But however unpopular, without any regard to electoral consequences, we insisted on doing nothing that might stop the rise. And we've been able to do this—we've been able to afford a 9 per cent rise in earnings—because we've got an incomes policy. Oh yes, the Tories used to talk about one. But we've actually had the courage and the guts to get on with the job.
Of course, it won't be easy. The Swedes took twenty years to establish their incomes policy. That's why I've always said that 1966 is our make-or-break year; the year in which we've got to decide whether we're going to go forward to the New Britain in which every year for the next twenty years will be a make-or-break year, or whether we're going to drift back to the shallows of Tory complacency and self-seeking. And to show us the way forward we've already brought out—what the Tories in thirteen years failed to bring out—a Great National Plan : a purposive plan for 4 per cent growth by 1970. Last year the economy grew at 2 per cent, and there is every indication that we shall achieve the re- maining 2 per cent in 1966, to reach the target well ahead of schedule. And you know, we've done all this while keeping the economy strong, employment strong, and sterling strong—even though there have not been lacking those among our opponents who have not scrupled to sell sterling short for political advantage. Let me make it clear to the Tory speculators that they do so at their own peril : when a Labour government is returned we shall go on giving the maintenance of the strength of sterling the first priority that Socialists have always insisted it should have.
Of course, we haven't been able to keep all our promises. Sometimes, however tough, we've had to disappoint some of our own supporters. Quite frankly, I was as bitterly opposed to the Tories' vicious 1962 Immigration Act as anyone. But when we came in we found that, however unpopular, we had to tighten it still further, because evasions had reached the point where the law itself was coming into dis- repute. And Labour has always stood for the rule of law: that is what we are fighting for in Rhodesia. That's another tough, incredibly tough, problem that the Tories had swept under the carpet. A few months ago I said that our policy of sanctions—so bitterly opposed by the Tories—would bring results within weeks rather than months. Well, sanctions may not be bringing the results we expected; they may even be bring- ing exactly the opposite results; but, you know, you've got to admit that they are bringing results.
And this isn't the only way in which we've strengthened the Commonwealth: Last year we took the unprecedented initiative of setting up a Commonwealth peace mission, whose members included apart from myself the new President of Guinea, to end the tragic conflict in Vietnam. As we said in our manifesto, 'while this initiative was not successful, it nevertheless points to a further and most important development of the Commonwealth': the launching of further un- successful initiatives throughout the world.
For, under Labour, Britain has begun to count again in the counsels of the world. Once again, after thirteen years of Tory drift, we are at the top tables as of right. Only last month I talked with the Soviet leaders—and I know them pretty well—in Moscow. I spoke quite frankly with them. Our opponents, always ready to sell Britain short, may say that nothing came of those talks. Perhaps. But what matters is that, in spite of bitter opposition from the Tories and their allies, the talks took place at all. Elsewhere, we have taken the lead in the war on want by pegging aid for four years. By keeping the blue
berets out of Rhodesia, we have saved the United Nations from disaster. Everywhere, Britain is being listened to with a new interest, a new respect. It is no accident that that great Ameri- can, Senator Barry Goldwater, recently singled out the British Labour government for special praise among the nations of the West. What Tory government could have earned this tribute?
And so, with a fair wind and a full day's work for a full day's pay, standing on our feet and head held high, chin up and a stiff upper lip, let us get on with the job of building the New Britain—a Britain that counts in the world. And let us remember, as we march forward to theonext five years, the immortal words of that great Socialist, the Duke of Wellington, on the eve of the battle of Waterloo : cry God for Harold, sterling and the Queen!
Previous page
