LIBERALS AND LABOUR
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—May I be permitted to thank Mr. Ross Williamson for his more exact definition of the Socialist short programme to which Labour is now committed ? May I add one or two comments ?
First, I am not opposed in principle to the measures con- tained in that programme. Indeed I welcome them. Laissez- faire radicalism no longer commands the allegiance of Liberals. But in the second place, my support of this short programme depends on three conditions. I cannot support nationalisation except on the basis of adequate compensation for the private interests affected. I cannot support nationalisation unless the form of national control contains the best possible safeguards against the evils of bureaucracy and political corruption. I should not support the hurried enactment of these Socialist measures unless it was clear that they would immediately further and not hinder the maintenance of international peace and economic recovery. In my judgement no Liberal should offer a non-possumus to Labour's short programme, but no Liberal can unconditionally support it.
I cannot understand Mr. Williamson's assertion that twice Labour has accepted a " progressive " alliance. Twice Labour has been in office, dependent on Liberal support, and twice Labour has refused to make the alliance with progressives which might have saved Labour Governments from disastrous failure. The real issue in British politics is just this : does Labour still think it more important to destroy Liberalism than t3 save Europe ? The issue stands out clearly in Mr. Frank Pakenham's letter of August 20th, though apparently he does not see it himself : "An enlightened British policy in regard to foreign affairs and disarmament could by this time have started the world on the path of reducing, not increasing, armaments." This is the conviction not only of Socialists but of the majority of the citizens of this country. We cannot giv.: effect to it because Labour refuses to act with that majority by tying itself up to a Socialist philosophy and. a Socialist programme of w lich not even its own supporters
are fully convinced.—Yours, &c., H. G. WOOD.
Previous page
