AT WESTMINSTER
ALTHOUGH the weightiest business of Parliament this competitive television—the debate in the House of week has been the first stage of the great argument on Lords on Wednesday and Thursday—the most extraordinary event was the blaze of anger which Sir Winston Churchill set going among his supporters on Tuesday. There has been nothing quite like it in this Parliament. It was so spontaneous and so fierce that it shrivelled. in a, flash one of the most cherished conventions of the Conservatives, that quarrels within the party, however passionate they may be, should be conducted in private. The cause of the outbreak was Sir Winston's refusal to increase the pensions of those retired officers whose rates were fixed in 1935. This decision was condemned by Tories as " wholly unacceptable," " outrageous," " a betrayal of trust," and " thoroughly unsatisfactory "; and in the House of Lords, where a similar statement was made by Lord Salisbury, General Lord Jeffreys said that the decision would cause " more than disappointment."
* * * * This show of feeling was powerful enough to compel Sir Winston to summon a meeting of his Cabinet on Wednesday morning—the third Cabinet in three days and the second devoted to this topic of pensions. Meanwhile Labour back- benchers were well content for once to assist rather than to lead an attack on the Government.
* * * * It was a disappointment to contestants on both sides of the television argument that Lord Halifax was not well enough to attend the debate in the Lords which took place on his own motion expressing hostility to the Government's television policy. He remains a powerful and respected figure in the political world, and his interventions in debate have become too rare. Lord Halifax's supporters chose Lord Hailsham to take his place on Wednesday—an -honour for a relatively young peer who made a name in the Commons more for his spirit than for his solidity. The episcopal bench, the Tories and the Liberals are divided on the television issue in the House of Lords, and the Government may place special reliance on the views of its supporters in the House of Commons, which has yet to debate the matter. One curious development has occurred since the competitive television controversy started: it now .seems to be generally agreed, both by the critics and the supporters of the Government's policy that the existing television service of the BBC ought to have at least one competitor. * * * * The business of the House of. Commons on Wednesday had to be changed because of the importunity of one man—a Labour back-bencher, Mr. Harold Lever. Mr. Lever rose to speak at 1.42 p.m. last Friday and demanded the withdrawal of a Bill that authorises the continuance of loans to the film industry. He decided that he could best enforce this demand by preventing the Government from putting the motion for the second reading to the vote. This meant that Mr. Lever must go on speaking continuously until 3.59 p.m., which he did, and that the Government must fail to force the closure, which it, too, did. The second reading had therefore to be concluded this week. Mr. Lever does not speak often but he certainly chooses his moments and his themes. It 'was he who introduced the Defamation Bill in an earlier session.
* * * * Mr. George Ward, the Under-Secretary for Air, put the House, of Commons in his debt on Monday by teaching them a new phrase of Air Ministry jargon. He had been asked to state the average cost of building married quarters for servicemen, and he hesitated at first because he thought that any figures he gave-might be misleading. But the Opposition was determined to have figures, and at last Mr. Ward said: " I can give what we call a blotting-paper figure," and the House was interested to get " a blotting-paper figure for an
Previous page
