NOT, I THINK, enough to win them the election, though
in a sense this is a comment almost as unfair as most of the editorials that have so far appeared on the subject. The Labour Party, after all, can reply that it and its opponents are always being accused of catchpenny elec- tioneering, and that when they produce a cautious and painstaking programme of this sort they are accused of being dull and vague. But the fact remains that the Labour Party's proposals are dull and vague, and won't win them the election. What are they to do? There is nothing left in the Labour kitty except this kind of tinkering on the one hand and the grandiose 1945-type scheme (which would alienate more voters than it would attract) on the other. Faced with two such programmes, the voters are unlikely to want a change from the one they have at the moment. This is is a pity; not only because it is arguably time for a change anyway, but also because the Tories are so much more likely than their oppo- nents to break out into a Suez every now and again, and the next time may be the last. What One really wants is a party that can be trusted both at home and abroad. If we ever find one, It will not need sixpenny pamphlets to gain sup- Port. Or Colman, Prentice and Varley.
Previous page
