An example to Mr Wilson
Getting on for two hundred years ago, Lord George Gordon (of the Gordon riots) delivered his verdict on the political situa- tion of the day : 'The Government has lost the confidence of the country, and the Opposition has not regained it.' Until about a week ago it would have been possible to argue that much the same analysis was valid at the present time. This phase now seems to be over. The results of last week's by-elections were of the first importance. At Dudley the Conservatives increased their vote by more than 5,000 and at Meriden by over 4,000— ln each case within the context of a substan- tially lower overall poll. The Opposition has begun positively to regain the confidence of the country.
There is, it is true, no clear evidence that this confidence has been won by Mr Heath and the new-style efficiency-first Tory party. It seems just as likely that the Tory converts were moved chiefly by nostalgia; by memo- ries of a time when things, however bad they may have seemed then, were at least a good deal better than they are today, and when the leadership of the nation, however uncertain its direction, was at least conducted with panache and style.
It has, of course, become fashionable to argue that the Tories do not deserve to return to power, because they have no policy. By this is presumably meant that they have no distinctive policy of their own. It is true that the policy gap between the parties is not as great as could be wished, but this is largely because of the Government's steady move away from socialism (while more fundamen- tal political differences, such as the conflict between liberalism and technocracy, cut right across traditional party lines). But this criticism overlooks the crucial fact that the sensible alternative to doing x is frequently not doing y instead, but simply not doing x. We are a grossly overgoverned people as it is.
The latest version of the Government's incomes policy, as set out in Wednesday's White Paper, is a case in point. It is so full of loopholes of kinds—and so manifestly im- possible to enforce even if it were not—that it cannot possibly have any impact whatever on the rate of wage increase between August and the end of next year. Happily, this has little direct bearing on the economic situation, as Mr Jenkins had the good sense to frame his Budget on the assumption that the in- comes policy would fail. The incomes policy is simply the icing on the cake designed to bolster confidence overseas. But the price paid will be high. For although the new incomes legislation will have no direct economic effect, it will alarm all honest trade unionists, play right into the hands of the most disrup- tive elements in industry, and cause further disunity within the governing party. The alternative to having a so-called policy of this kind is, quite simply, not having it.
Moreover, even where the two parties' poli- cies have become identical, the public are beginning to recognise that the Conservatives are the better placed to carry them out suc- cessfully. This is not a matter of innate ability. It is, in part, that a government that has failed as disastrously as has the present Government cannot enjoy the authority of a new administration—even if its policies are now more or less on the right lines. And it is in part, too, because these policies are funda- mentally alien to the sentiments of the Labour party in Parliament and in the country, whereas a Conservative government would suffer no similar handicap.
The devaluation, and Mr Jenkins's Budget, provide in a very real sense a last chance to put the British economy right this side of a fundamental economic—and probably politi- cal—collapse. The national interest demands that we are given the best possible chance of making a success of this strategy. It may be unreasonable to expect Mr Wilson to offer the resignation of his whole Government to this aim, and allow his political enemies to regain power. But it is certainly not un- reasonable to expect him to offer his own resignation to save his country and his party. For it is Mr Wilson's own personal qualities that are very largely responsible for his Government's failures and its subsequent loss of moral and political authority. In 1964, and again in 1966, the people thought they were electing a technocrat : they have dis- covered that they had chosen only a verbocrat.
The Labour party possesses in Mr Jenkins an acceptable alternative leader, with the style that Mr Wilson has always lacked, and a growing following within his own party. On Sunday, President Johnson showed that he was big enough to put the national interest, and that of his party, above his own personal ambitions. It is an example that Mr Wilson, for long one of no's most ardent admirers, should now follow.
Previous page
