BOOKS A history of Heath

ROBERT RHODES JAMES

There is much to be said in favour of the argument that, for an objective political commentator, the only thing worse than having a prejudice against a man is having one in his favour. This yiew is by no means universal. The perceptive and sensitive politi- cal observer, A. G. Gardiner, was urged in his later years to return to his former craft, it being felt that a modern version of Prophets, Priests and Kings would be desir- able. He refused, on the grounds that he no longer knew the principal men in public life personally, and accordingly could not draw their portraits adequately. 1, in contrast, doubt whether true objectivity can really sur- vive such personal closeness.

I must, accordingly, emphasise that, like his biographer. George Hutchinson (Edward

Heath: A Personal and Political Bioraphy, 1.ongman 42s, paperback 16s), I wish Mr Heath well. I would not presume to claim friendship but 1 have known him for fifteen years, and my respect for him has risen steadily over that period. He is not a man who seeks public affection or popularity and he is notoriously deficient in the minor charlatanries; it is not surprising, therefore, to find that his former headmaster com- mented on him that 'he was anything but popular. He never tried for popularity. He wasn't actively liked or actively disliked. He was respected and accepted.' In public he often epitomises the highly descriptive American adjective 'uptight', approaching his audiences with a wariness and tenseness that communicates itself tangibly, and which can create an uncomfortable atmosphere of shared unease. But in private, in a small and congenial company, he is warm, confident and civilised. He is also genuinely kind and considerate. Too often in politics, the situa- tion is exactly the reverse, and it is unhappily the case that relatively few politicians im- prove on closer acquaintance. In this respect, as in so many others, Mr Heath is an excep- tion to the general rule.

It would be easy to depict his rise as though there were something incredible in the fact that a man of such genuinely humble origins should become leader of the Con- servative party. What is interesting, and in- deed unique, is the manner in which he rose.

Perhaps the two greatest disasters that can befall an able new MP are to join the Whips' Office or to become a PPS. There are, it is true, compensations, but the long-term dis- advantages far outweigh these. Perhaps the most serious is that the young politician escapes the frustrating but essential period when he is endeavouring to discover how to interest and impress the House of Commons and thereby to establish himself as an identifiable individual among 630. It is not a particularly enjoyable period of a political career, but it is an essential one; the relatively late rise of Baldwin and Macmillan—to take two conspicuous recent examples—owed a great deal to their long periods of apprentice- ship in what Sir Alan Herbutt has happily described as 'the black arts of debate'.

After an admirable and original maiden speech in 1951, in which he urged British entry into the Schumann Plan. Mr Heath al- most immediately disappeared into the Whips' Otii,:e for seven years. When he

answered his first questions as Minister of Labour in 1959 he broke a House of Com- mons silence that had been interrupted only by the formal moving of Parliamentary writs, motions for the adjournment, and the closure. The spoken word is the politician's most crucial weapon—particularly when in Opposition. I am convinced that Mr Heath's seven years' silence has played an important part in his relative failure to develop his own style.

The immediate advantages of his appoint- ment were, of course, very considerable. The characteristic perception of Mr Patrick Buchan-Hepburn (now Lord Hailes) gave Mr Heath an opportunity which was brilliantly taken, when he was Chief Whip during the Suez crisis, of demonstrating his abilities. One of his former colleagues does not exag- gerate when he says that 'the party would almost certainly have fallen apart without him' during Suez. Perhaps his most remark- able achievement of all was to gain and retain the admiration and respect of those Conservatives who were most distressed by the Government's actions. He demonstrated that he was not only tough, clear-headed, and well-informed—by then, none doubted that he possessed these qualities—but that he had a sensitiveness and a comprehension that had not been so widely appreciated. Mr Hutchin- son says of Mr Heath's attitude to the Suez policy that 'I have reason to believe that his heart was not in it'. There are many indica- tions that Mr Hutchinson's assessment is correct, but he saw his task as essentially that of holding the party together duPing its trauma. To achieve this required very excep- tional qualities of insight and timing, and it is impossible to fault Mr Heath on any point.

" Suez did not, by itself, definitely establish Mr Heath's position; this was achieved in the aftermath, and the long, difficult, climb back R.R.G. Heath: "The policy of the Govern- ment is that of turning all four cheeks"; From 'Isis', 23 November 1938. to the Conservative victory of 1959. He was a very professional organiser of the business of the House; he was always approachable; his understanding of the House and the Parliamentary party was acute. But he was always something more than an organiser, and Mr Hutchinson is surely correct in em- phasising his influence on policy decisions during this period. The importance of his contribution to the Conservative revival of 1957-59 was even more clearly seen when he was succeeded by a man of many excellent qualities, but not of comparable calibre. In particular. the breakdown in communication between the Treasury Bench and the rank and file between 1960 and 1963 which was one of the principal contributory factors in the destruction of the Macmillan govern- ment, would have been inconceivable with Mr Heath as Chief Whip. - After a very brief spell at the Ministry of Labour, there came Europe. Mr Hutchinson describes the events of the first application to

join the EEC relatively briefly, but fairly. In this complex story, Mr Heath was in his

element—a cause in which he deeply be- lieved, a mass of intricate detail to be mastered, and a highly talented team of Ministers and officials to work with. In the Commons. one could feel his self-confidence increasing. One private speech, to a party body. was described by a former Cabinet Minister, not over-inclined to bestow praise on others, as the most brilliant and convinc- ing performance he had ever heard in public life. Nevertheless, an ominous note of thinly. veiled intellectual contempt for those in his own party who had opposed the applica- tion was sometimes apparent. He routed them totally in debate—perhaps too totally for his own good. For the first time, one was aware of a definite hostility developing towards him in some quarters of the Conservat;ve party, based less on the policies he was advo- cating than on the manner with which he dealt with sincere, if often muddled-thinking, criticism.

The disappointment to Mr Heath of the French veto, although well concealed in pub- lic, must have been severe. This check was quickly followed by another, which tem- porarily affected a career which had seemed to be outstripping those of all his con- temporaries. The abolition of Resale Price Maintenance was, no doubt, desirable. What was certainly unfortunate, and surprising.

was for Mr Heath to adopt a truculent, and again at times almost contemptuous, attitude towards those Conservatives who were opposed to his proposals. It was an internal battle fought with some bitterness, and al-

though it is probably generally forgotten to- day, it left its mark. It was difficult at the time to decide whether to applaud his determina- tion or lament his obstinacy. I was not at all involved in the dispute, but my most abiding memory of that difficult period is of an even- ing encounter with Mr Heath when things were at their worst, and yet he was—although defiant—witty, sardonic, and self-deprecat- ing.

This episode revived and accentuated the emotions against Mr Heath which had arisen in the Common Market disputes, and it was fortunate for him that his principal rivals had, by 1965, effectively eliminated them- selves for various reasons. The events leading up to Sir Alec Douglas-Home's resignation of the leadership and Mr Heath's subsequent election will, I am sure, furnish admirable material for future political histories. I Sus- pect that Mr Hutchinson knows a good deal more about this episode than he is prepared to publish at this stage, and I for one fully accept his firm acquittal of Mr Heath from the charge of any personal involvement in the tactics of some of his supporters. But the incident left an unpleasant aftertaste for many of Sir Alec's admirers—although not for Sir Alec himself—and at least partly ex-- plains the extraordinary malevolence with which some of them have ceaselessly derided Mr Heath ever since. It is my assessment that this calculated denigration has had a real effect on his self-confidence. Mr Hutchinson quotes Mr Roy Jenkins saying of Mr Heath that 'he seemed to me [at Oxford] more self- confident then than he is now'. Looking back on the 1950s, the same comment could apply.

It seems now generally accepted that Mr Heath's career is critically poised. If the Conservatives win—all well and good; if they do not .. . It is true that the Conserva- tive party has traditionally little time for leaders who fail to deliver the electoral goods, and that to be a two-time loser is unlikely to endear a leader to any political confedera- tion. Nonetheless, I do not share the general view.

Mr Heath has risen to his present posi- tion principally as a result of his absolute— indeed, almost awesome—dedication to his undergraduate ambition to be a professional politician. Perhaps he is too much a poli- _ tician's politician, and it is certainly the case that the respect he has won in a narrow circle has not yet spread as far as the Con- servative managers would like. His manifest preference for professional technicians and 'efficiency' invited the Selsdon Man' gibe, and it must be admitted that to an outsider there is, collectively, a certain absence of human warmth about some of. his closest colleagues. But his choice demonstrates, I believe, his impatience with the kind of glib, generalised, politician who, in his view, has led this country into innumerable misfor- tunes. He may have taken this attitude too far, but when Mr Heath says that he is more interested in sensible actions than fine phrases there is an authentic note about what would be, in most politicians' mouths, a tired cliché.

But it has also been suggested that in fact he is a romantic, under stern self-control. I believe that there is much truth in this view. He is fiercely patriotic. He was a vehement critic of the Chamberlain government— whose foreign policy he depicted as 'if at first you don't concede, fly, fly, fly again'— took an active part against the official Con- servative candidate (Quintin Hogg) in the Oxford by-election of 1938, and was opposed to the Franco regime in the Spanish civil war. He was a convinced European long before it became politically fashionable. More recently, his repudiation of Mr Enoch Powell was not only a courageous act, it was also one motivated by strong moral feelings. It was not for nothing that he was one of the first members of the 'One Nation' group. In short, I cannot believe that a man of such talents, spirit and determination will not make a substantial contribution to the future of this nation, whatever the result of the general election.

It is not easy to write contemporary bio- graphy, and Mr Hutchinson's contribution is workmanlike rather than inspired. But it does give die essential outlines of a remarkable career and a deeply interesting personality, and 1 think that he summarises his subject well when he writes: 'As I see him, Heath is an unusually self-sufficient person. To an extent that is probably rare, be does not depend on others, even close friends : while he is glad to see them, they are not essential to him. He is self-contained, detached, reserved . . . He is above all a doer.'