A Socialist Looks at His Party
BY DESMOND DONNELLY, MP THE Blackpool Conference of the Labour Party a fortnight hence is the first to take place in the new era. Mr. Attlee's leadership is dead and in Elysian fields. Mr. Hugh Gaitskell will be facing the delegates for the first time in his new role. There are going to be many anxious debates on future policy. These will revolve around the first of the policy documents that were heralded last year with such steaming vigour by Mr. James Griffiths, the party's perennial John the Baptist. Finally, this will be Mr. Frank Cousins's first conference as full-blown General Secretary of the Trans- port and General Workers' Union and his first conference as a political figure fresh from his triumph at Brighton.
How different it all was last year at Margate. Then the General Election was only just over. The party workers were mostly exhausted, mentally and physically. The Left wing, which had been preaching that a policy of `full-blooded Socialism' (whatever that is) was the Open Sesame to a parlia- mentary majority, had at last discovered that theirs was not the way to win friends and influence people. The Right wing, which had imagined that its `sensible policy' was God's gift to the electorate. had been told by the same electorate that by definition `sensible policy' was understood to mean 'no policy at all.'
In addition, the struggle for the succession to Mr. Attlee was unresolved. Mr. Attlee was passionately beseeched to stay on, apparently for ever, by Mrs. Castle at the eve-of- conference rally. Mr. Zilliacus also announced his surprising support. As for Mr. Attlee, resembling a Republican Presi- dential candidate whilst he was thus pursued—he absorbed himself in the sports page of The Times. All that seems long ago.
The Labour Party's transformation from last year stems directly, in the first place, from the policies of the Tory Government. Whereas Sir Anthony Eden had begun by appear- ing as an invincible knight in armour, now he becomes daily more like a lath of wood painted to look like iron. Twelve months ago Mr. Butler had yet to produce the most politically inept Budget of modern times. Mr. Lennox Boyd had only just started his exercises in Turkish-bath politics. Mr. Selwyn Lloyd was not yet known to be so unknown. Finally there was no issue of the explosive magnitude of Suez to unite the party—from the admirers of Mr. William Warbey to those of Mr. Denis Healey.
But that is only part of the story. The ending of the struggle for the leadership is equally important. It is true that Mr. Hugh Gaitskell is not to everyone's liking. Although he has made several brilliant parliamentary speeches, he still makes them far too long and thus diffuses their effect. He has made some tactical errors. But he has brought a sense of co-ordina- tion to much of the parliamentary leadership where it was lacking; and above all, every week he proves himself extremely good in handling the Parliamentary Labour Party meeting.
Mr. Bevan, too, has settled down as an important member of the Opposition leadership. Admittedly many of the old animosities towards him remain. Periodically there is a muffled complaint in the lobbies about the amount of parliamentary time that is devoted to colonial affairs. But, particularly on the important current issue of Cyprus, Mr. Bevan in the House has been outstanding—in both the matter and the manner of his approach.
Therefore, with the leadership issue out of the way, the party has been able to concentrate more of its energies on future policy-making. Committees and sub-committees of its National Executive have been busy drafting statements as the basis for future discussion. That intrepid and energetic committee draughtsman, Mr. Crossman, has transferred his activities from writing memoranda exclusively for the Bevanites to making the fruits of his industry available even to Mr. Sam Watson.
So far, four official policy statements have appeared : Personal Freedom, Towards Equality, Homes of the Future, and The Plural Society. Mr. Gaitskell himself has written a Fabian pamphlet giving his views on nationalisation. Penguin Books have published a slim volume entitled Twentieth Century Socialism by the Socialist Commentary group. And to add to the revival in the discussion by printed word, a new-look Forward has just been launched under the editorship of Mr. Francis Williams.
The test of the effect of this internal debate that has started is dependent upon two criteria. First, are the so-called new policies that are emerging relevant to the fresh problems facing Britain and the world in the second half of the twentieth century? Secondly, are they understood to be so relevant by the British public at large?
Taking the second question first, the zealous party sup- porter may point to the remarkable trends in recent by-elec- tions. But to accept this assessment would be to, accept a quite wrong impression. Much of the swing is clearly attribu- table to middle-class disillusionment with Government policy. Also, there is as yet no reliable evidence that the change in majorities is due to people who voted Tory last time voting Labour now : it is much more a matter of traditional Tory voters staying away from the polls. Finally not one by-election voter in a hundred has heard of Labour's policy discussions and not one party worker in ten has ever taken the trouble to read them.
But more important. by far, is the practical relevance to our national problems of the contributions to the policy debate to date. It is here that the party optimists would do well to pause and ponder. Does Personal Freedom make any impact on the issue of how we liberate the latent energy and drive of a country that is obviously being thwarted by an economy that is too rigid in its private sector as well as in its public sector? Does the Equality statement make a contribution to the major challenge of economic growth? As one wag has put it, 'It is much more like an invitation to eat lettuce and raw turnip with Mr. Douglas Jay.' Homes of the Future has raised serious and as yet unanswered doubts about the prac- tical problems of finance. It is only in The Plural Society (what a title!) that there is a note clearly in harmony with the great orchestra of political debate in the world.
It seems that the bitter internal argument that has raged for five years within the Labour Party has left its thinkers and writers exhausted. Where their springs of new thought are not exhausted, there is instead a mood of desiring agreement for agreement's sake and a shrinking back from the political adage that 'you cause no ripples unless you throw some stones.'
Finally, as shown in Forward, there is still the arid argument amongst some people that the issue is between those who want to do something and those who do not—the last refuge of ya-boo nitwittery.
Thus the Labour Party goes to Blackpool by way of last year's Margate Pier. It is only just out of its hangover stage and as yet its clearing vision is not focused on definite targets —the most important of which is the translation of the early hopes of its pioneers into the practical realities of 1956. This prospect I will try to examine in the next article.
Previous page
