Reforming Tories
Some Proposals for Constitutional Reform, Being the Recom- mendations of a Group of Conservatives. (Eyre and Spottiswoode. 7s. 6d.)
ONE of the very many advantages of organisation possessed by the Socialist Party over its opponents lies in the many varieties of method and degrees of authority with which aspects of party policy can be published or discussed. From the avowedly commissioned pamphlet to the excellent productions of the Fabian Research organisation a very wide range of more or less official publications exists discussing or stating policy with almost every degree of detail and authority. In the Conservative Party only two main types of literature exist—the official manifesto which must bear the imprimatur of the Leader of the party and central office propa- ganda which, being unable to state a positive view on any matter on which any minority is in disagreement, suffers from the dullness and want of precision and originality which heavily censored material must inevitably display.
An attempt was made before the Election to get round the difficulty by the use of study groups officially known as " Looking Ahead" Committees appointed by a central committee under the chairmanship of Mr. R. A. Butler to publish reports on different aspects of policy. These reports were of considerable value in stimulating thought within the party—but failed to convince the public because they were unofficial pronouncements, or to win a large circulation because they were unattractively bound and printed and suffered from the flat soda-water effect of composite authorship. Attempts like those of the Tory Reform Committee to produce more definite views in a more presentable form resulted in more workmanlike propaganda but aroused opposition from their contro- versial nature, and the limited nature of the circle through whose efforts they were produced.
Some Proposals for Constitutional Reform comes out of the " Looking Ahead " rather than the " Tory Reform " stable, but has not been accorded even the limited official recognition enjoyed by the former series. Accordingly the reader is left somewhat mystified despite the attractive green dust-cover, and the imprint of a famous publishing firm, to know exactly whom the distinguished list of authors represents, with what degree of authority they speak, why they came together, or with what terms of reference they produce a booklet on Constitutional Reform—not in the main a subject troubling Conservatives or likely to excite their opponents at the present juncture. This, however, is not the authors' fault, and the reader who overcomes his mystification will find an opcn- minded and instructive little discussion on almost all the current constitutional problems of the day—from the reform of the House of Lords to the selection of Parliamentary candidates and the structure and reorganisation of Government Departments.
The proposals contained in the volume are in some respects surprisingly radical. No hereditary peer is to sit by succession in the Lords unless he himself possesses a distinguished record of public service; life peers—not excluding the purely hereditary element so summoned—are to be created. The polders of the second Chamber are to remain unaltered. An odd omission is the failure to provide that hereditary peers deprived of their present privileges shall be permitted to vote at elections or be elected as Members of the Lower House, or that those who prefer a career in the Lower House should be free to accept it.
Conscious of the defects in the methods of selecting candidates in the, past, the group recommend that local party organisations should be disaffiliated unless the National Union is satisfied that they represent a substantial percentage of Conservative electors. All donations by a candidate or member to his local political associa- tion should, they urge, be forbidden by law, and election expenses of all candidates, successful and unsuccessful, apart from " freaks " should be borne by a grateful country.
The signatories have also important suggestions to make on defence, on economic policy, and on the machinery of Government. They recommend that a Standing Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, which should include at least one representa- tive of the Opposition, should publish annually a report on the adequacy of defence organisation to be debated by Parliament before the introduction of the estimates. They endorse the Haldane Com- mittee's recommendations on the reorganisation and grouping of departments. They consider that a smaller Cabinet based on this regrouping should be substituted for the larger peacetime Cabinet of some twenty members; and recommend that a new department under a separate Minister should be set up to control the Civil Service in place of the present arrangement which puts it under the Treasury.
As a basis for discussion in a political study circle, this book is ideal; as a serious contribution to the study of our institutions it is reasonable and informative. Its defect lies in the absence of a clear explanation of the purpose which it is intended to achieve. It is a reconstruction pamphlet published a year too late. It lacks the sense of enthusiasm for the balance and decency of our institu- tions which should inform good Conservative writing on constitu- tional theory without acquiring the urgency and pungency of the real advocate of reform. As an exposition of party policy it is clearly not authoritative. It has the indefinable character of an official report without being official. It is neither an exposition, a vindication nor an indictment of current constitutional usage. It is an experiment in Conservative literature, and such experiments are to be encouraged. But it may be doubted whether the true line of development has yet been found. . QunguN Hock.
Previous page
