The Week in Parliament
THE decision of the Prime Minister to begin a new session in the autumn of this year has been generally welcomed in the House; It has also necessitated a restricted legislative programme.
The Trade Union Bill and the Budget are the two salient points around which the political struggle will be conducted, for it is hoped that the Unemployment Insurance Bill will be more or less an agreed measure.
Factory, Poor Law, Franchise, and House of Lords reforms—all unfortunately and lavishly decked out with pledges—have been relegated to a mercifully obscure future. Even so, the 1927 parliamentary pie is substan- tial if a little stodgy. Sprinkled with a few minor bills and seasoned with periodical debates on China and Russia, it is more than ample enough to occupy the sustained and occasionally strained attention of members until July.
The crust was gingerly opened last week by Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, after the Address had been moved and seconded in two admirable speeches from Mr. Oliver Stanley and Major Macandrewi It is to be feared that the Leader of the Opposition is incorrigible. His speeches on China were delivered in an agony of indecision. He squirmed now this way now that, and before he sat down fogged himself and the House to such an extent that no one knew what his opinions were, if he had any. Finally, he trotted meekly into the lobby behind Mr. Mosley and the lyde men, in support of an amendment of the terms of Inch he cannot possibly have approved at any period. So once again he listened to the fatal voices from behind, and shrank, as he has always shrunk, from leadership.' Mr. Thomas's method was more characteristic. He said nothing at all, and was absent from the division paired. Only Dr. Haden Guest had the courage of his convictions and supported the Government. Mr. Tom Johnston 'Poke effectively as usual, but his arguments about the conditions of labour in certain Shanghai mills failed to convince the House Of the desirability. of leaving the whole of the British community to its fate. And Sir Austen Chamberlain had no difficulty in obtaining applause and a large majority for his policy.
The Liberal amendment dealt with rating, and two or three of them hung about and addressed, at intervals, an empty house. But the debate on the trade union legislation was more lively. Mr. Churchill had already excited the Labour men by asking pointed questions upon the first day, one of which;was whether they thought it right that anyone should be compelled to contribute to the funds of a political party to which he did not belong.
Mr. Clynes and Mr. Thomas led the Opposition attack, and Mr. Duff Cooper made a spirited reply for the Conser- vative " whole-hoggers." This would have been a good speech if it had been ten minutes shorter. Doubts were expressed by Mr. Geoffrey Ellis, who has much improved his style of speaking, and Mr. Skelton. Sir Douglas Hogg wound up vigorously, saying nothing with all the emphasis at his command, and the humble address was forwarded to His Majesty as originally drafted: The House still obstinately declines to listen to its back-bench members, and is at present rather listless. The Trade Union Bill will probably galvanize it into life, and there is no reason why debate should not be keen and com- petent, if crude. Most of the defence work will fall on Mr. Churchill's shoulders.
With regard to the Trade Union legislation, speculation is rife as to the intentions of the Government. In point of fact no decision has been reached. But it is significant that the Conservative members who are pressing most hotly for drastic action are those who represent the largess number of trade unionists. There must, therefore, be a demand for it, .for these meinbers, however altruistic; would hardly be willing to commit political suicide for the dubious pleasure of irritating the trade union movement, even in the interests of abstract justice and truth.
WATCHMAN.
Previous page
