The case for an election now
Sir: For anyone who should be misled into taking Mr Skeffington-Lodge seriously, there are a few points which should be made con- cerning his latest letter (24 May): firstly, as in so many of his letters, it completely lacks any factual arguments, and is based, as usual, on the belief that `Mr Skeffington-Lodge knows best.' In his assertions as to what the results of a future Conservative government would be, Mr Skeffington-Lodge must have a very short memory, because simple precedent alone proves him wrong. Yet he makes the fantastic state- ment that a future government under Mr Heath would be `divisive'! What, one wonders, is Mr Skeffington-Lodge thinking of? Surely he has got the wrong party. Let us look at the situation as it is at present: since the election of 1964 I know of only two issues on which Conservative Ii4PS have divided, yet we all know which party (under Mr Skeffington-Lodge's adored idol) has split itself on every conceivable issue, usque ad nauseam.
Secondly, .Mr Skeffington-Lodge again laments upon the so-called 'personalised' attack upon the present occupant of 10 Downing Street, as if this were something new. One should remember that the Prime Minister most maligned by `personalised' attack was Sir Alec Douglas-Home: the difference between the press attacks on Sir Alec and Mr Wilson is that the press never gave Sir Alec a chance. Mr Wilson was given the opportunity to prove him- self—and failed. He must be prepared to take the consequences, however unpalatable they may be to him or, for that matter, to Mr Skeffington-Lodge.
Previous page
