Sad story
Richard Ritchie
Enoch Powell: Principle in Politics Roy Lewis (Cassell E7.95) There are two ways of helping an intelligent understanding of Enoch Powell's career. The first is to allow Powell to speak for himself; and this I attempted to do irt the most recent study of his speeches published last year. Such an approach can provide helpful answers to the many questions surrounding Powell, but the final result falls short of what a biography can offer. In the foreword to his new book, Mr Lewis describes his role as 'biographer and expositor of the history of powellism'; he succeeds in giving a knowledgeable and detailed account of Powell's political career and speeches, but readers who expect more than this will be disappointed. Powell's biography remains to be written.
Mr Lewis begins with Powell's refusal to stand as a Conservative candidate in the General Election of February 1974. At the time, Powell described his resignation as 'a sacrifice'; the publication of this book coincides with the moment when the true extent of this 'sacrifice' can be appreciated. In 1974 Powell committed what he believed to be political suicide in order to save Britain from the EEC; a Conservative victory, he said, would mean that the question of Britain and the Community was 'settled and irreversible'. In the event, he helped to keep the question open, only to witness five years later the return of the Conservatives to office with their commitment to the EEC intact.
Contrary to his expectations, he remains a Member of Parliament: but despite his success in winning extra parliamentary seats for Ulster, he sees his party without influence in the House of Commons and weakened by the defeats imposed upon it by the so-called Unionists led by Mr Paisley. Of Powell, Mr Lewis says that 'One might say his whole life had been a preparation for February 1974'; it might be more accurate to suggest that Powell had devoted his whole life to preventing February 1974 from ever having taken place, and that in this objective he failed. Has he therefore today any cause for pride, satisfaction, or hope?
Mr Lewis concludes that 'The principles and passion that made Powell a force in politics unmade his career as a man of office and power. That is exactly why he made his unique contribution to British political experience.' This is• a fair conclusion. Powell would have wished to have held high office; indeed he has said that 'it is not a great parliamentarian who. . if he has the opportunity with his colleagues to assume responsibility would refuse it'. On the other hand, sometimes there were higher principles to be served. In 1958, for example, Powell resigned from the Treasury, along with the Chancellor (Thorneycroft) and the Economic Secretary (Birch). Lewis states that Thorneycroft had told his juniors they need not resign, but nevertheless they did so. Within two years, Powell was invited to return to the Government as Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education; he declined the invitation not because he disliked the job, but because an offer to rejoin the Government had not been made to Thorneycroft. Here, therefore, was a politician in an early part of his career who turned down office for the sake of an ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer who had been passed over; and today politicians complain of their salaries!
In retrospect, it is clear that Powell was never destined to climb 'the greasy pole' in the traditional fashion. He has, however, influenced British politics to a greater extent than many Prime Ministers ever succeed in doing. He has played a major part in restoring the Conservative Party's commitment to free enterprise, although it is ironic that this should have taken place at a time when his interest in economics is overshadowed by constitutional anxieties. Indeed, one of the interesting aspects of Powell's career lately has been his relative neglect of the policies associated with the 'libertarian' wing of the Conservative party. This is something which Mr Lewis might have explored at greater length. Individual freedom is, of course, still important to Powell, but only in the context of a free, independent nation. He remains opposed to the confiscation of private property, the destruction of private education, and the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange; but he would accept it all if this was the only way to get Britain'out of the EEC. In 1974, this option remained open and some Conservatives were prepared to follow his advice; he was asking more than he knew, both of his former party and of himself, when he expected the same obedience in 1979.
Powell, therefore, has failed in the objective he cares about most, although his influence upon the Conservative Party has been greater than even he imagines. He once said that . at the end of a lifetime in politics when a man looks back, he discovers that the things he has most opposed have come to pass and that nearly all the objects he set out with are not merely not accomplished, but seem to belong to a different world from the one he lives in.' These words were written in 1963, and perhaps they are vindicated by the past five years. Powell still remains, however, the parliamentary giant of his generation; his position within the House of Commons is unique; and the collection of books about him —to which Mr Lewis has provided a distinguished addition — will continue to grow. We still need a biography; but perhaps, in the words of Cole Porter, 'his story is just too sad to be told.'
Previous page
