Notebook
I am becoming increasingly sceptical about opinion polls. Either the wide differences between them indicate that those asked for their opinions are deliberately kidding the pollsters, or the pollsters are not doing their jobs properly. How, for example, can Gal lup give the Tories only a 51 per cent lead over Labour, while another poll published on the same day in the Observer, gives them a lead of 20 percent. Even working within the margin of a 6 percent error, it is surely an absurdity that such wide divergences exist. Perhaps those being polled are deliberately lying, because Labour canvassers in all areas, up the time of writing, are finding that canvass results are extremely encouraging and a Tory lead, even of 10 percent, is hard to find. On the basis of such excellent canvass returns gathered on the doorstep, Labour would be returned to Parliament with a big majority. These good canvass results as compared to the opinion polls are so disturbing some experienced Labour canvassers that they are slightly worried by them. I have even heard it suggested in one constituency that some canvassers from other areas should be brought in pretending to be Tories so that a further canvass could be made. One thing is very clear, there is no deep hostility towards Labour. My own experience proves this. Wherever I go, I find friendliness, goodwill and definite support for Labour. Even those who say they are voting Tory are courteous and polite. This is very different from the 1970 General Election, when Labour was ahead in the opinion polls right through the campaign. As we well remember on that occasion Labour lost. It has been said that in this election we may get a shock result. We certainly might!
The issue of jobs is of major importance in areas such as Merseyside. Although the number of unemployed fell by 2,000 last month, there are still approximately 82,000 unemployed on Merseyside. Dunlops has partially closed at Speke, so has KME at Kirkby, which will again increase the unemployment figures. It is understandable, therefore, that politicians' statements are seriously scrutinised on this issue and much interest is being shown in the two voices coming out of the Tory Party regarding what Government assistance Mersey side could expect from a future Tory Government. On the one hand, Sir Keith Joseph is quoted in the Liverpool Daily Post on 7 March as saying 'Merseyside does not have special problems. They are due to fallacies and faults which affect the whole country . . . The same cures are needed to rescue the whole country'. On the other hand, Mr Jim Prior (the friendly face of Conservatism?) is reported in the Liverpool Daily Post of 21 April, whilst electioneering in Liverpool, as saying 'Tories recognise that Merseyside has special problems, and a Conservative Government would get the economy going again, bringing more jobs to the region. . . Government aid was being spread too thinly around the country. More direct help should be given to areas like Merseyside'. Could it be that Sir Keith was actually telling the truth about Tory policy, whilst Jim Prior, speaking during the General Election Campaign, and in an area of high unemployment, was pursuing a policy of 'horses for courses'? Either way, there is clearly a division of opinion amongst leading Tories on the question of government aid for Special Development Areas like Merseyside, and this division gives no confidence to industrialists in the area, who prefer some continuity in Government aid policy, or to the working population whose anxieties are further increased by this lack of clear Tory attitudes.
Just before I left Westminster, a colleague said to me, 'Have a good campaign!' He was remarkably cheerful, considering his tiny majority over the Conservatives. Now, I have to be honest—and it's got nothing to do with majorities — I am not one who loves election campaigns. Although like most politicians, I am something of an extrovert, I do nevertheless find a great reluctance to knock on doors, selling myself as well as my party. The only saving grace of the whole thing is that one hears some amazing stories, and strange reasons why people vote the way they do. For example, the elderly lady, who said to me, 'I'm voting Conservative and always have'. I politely asked her reasons and she was only too happy to give them to me. She said that when she was a little girl, she lived in the Scotland division of Liverpool, a strong Roman Catholic area, with an Irish Nationalist MP, and she remembered when David Logan first stood as a Labour candidate, breaking the Nationalist tradition. Davey, or one of his supporters, had apparently promised that if he were elected, the children of the area who were very poor, would have a wonderful party. But the party was never held, and she said that this had turned her against Labour, and when she was able had voted Conservative and had done so ever since.
I am not one of those who seek to brush ideology under the carpet. I prefer to know where people stand and what they really believe in. The blurring of political edges, contrary to what some people think is not good for the democratic process. The 'middle ground' certainly has to be fought for, but only in the sense of winning over those who hold it to your point of view. To that extent it is refreshing to have a Tory leadership which genuinely believes in and advocates capitalism as being the best of all economic systems. It is also good to know that Tory leaders of the Thatcher/Joseph type have a deep distrust and distaste for the welfare state, as well as for Government intervention in economic affairs. It makes it that much easier for those of us who are only too willing to point out what TorY philosophy is all about and where it will lead. To that extent Mrs Thatcher and Sir Keith Joseph are perhaps too honest for their own electoral good. They may appeal to some younger people who did not experience the inter-war years, but they frighten the more elderly, even staunch Tories, who fear a return to the conditions of the Thirties. The free market economY was on a loose rein at that time, and thousands lived in poverty and misery. They have never forgotten the 'police clothes' for the children, the vouchers for food and above all the humiliation of it all. It is all very well talking about putting the 'Great back into Great Britain, but not if it means a return to those days. Since 1945, conditions of life have changed for millions of people. Despite the country's economic problems, people do have their small cars, their colour television sets, their telephones and holidays abroad, and the lot of pensioners has much improved. The truth is that the British working man has metaphorically had a taste of the pheasant and port wine and he likes it. and why not?
We should all be grateful for the piece written by Mrs Thatcher in last week's Sunday Express, especially when she wrote, 'There is no such thing as collective compassion, collective energy and collective ambition by Act of Parliament'. This really surns up her brand of Toryism, and just how wrong she can be. We had collective cornpassion with the setting up of the National Health Service, with the creation of our system of Social Security, and our social services. As for ambition, today there are thousands of degree-holders with working' class backgrounds, thanks to 'Collective ambition by Act of Parliamenf'. If the grant system had not been available, such educational talent would have been wasted. The truth is that, although Mrs Thatcher is being projected at the moment by her PR advisers as a 'moderate', her extremism peeps out in such articles as this. It is further revealed when she wrote 'behind Mr Callaghan are Leftist forces within his party which are determined to transform our countrY utterly and violently'. This is another way of rousing the people's fear that Labour intends to create an East European Coln' munist type state. One is entitled to who in the Labour Party wants violently t° change our society? Even our most lefi left-wingers would repudiate such a polieY. Her attack, however, is in line with Chtir. chill's 'Gestapo' smear. He was wrong then and she is wrong now. Labour could ariin4 that Toryism was akin to Fascism and ths some Tories believe in dictatorship. Wt don't because we know it to be untrue.
Previous page
