LIBERAL PARTY “SPLIT”

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 71, Issue 35, 21 November 1950, Page 3

LIBERAL PARTY “SPLIT”

INTEREST STILL GREAT VIEWS OF LADY MEGAN LLOYD GEORGE (From A. W. Mitchell, Special Correspondent, N.Z.P A.). (Rec. 8.5 a.m.) LONDON, Nov. 20. The “split” in the Liberal Party continues to be one of the most interesting aspects of the British political scene. The general opinion appears to be hardening in belief that, so long as this split continues, the Labour Government can defer the next General Election to suit its own convenience. Whether the Liberals can heal their differences—which began when Lady Megan Lloyd George, Deputy-Leader, Emrys Roberts and Edgar Granville voted with the Government on Housing, and abstained from voting on a Liberal amendment on the cost of living—is to be discussed by the party at a special meeting early this week. The Liberals hope to work out an understanding which will avoid further splits in important divisions in the House of Commons. Meanwhile Lady Violet Bonham Carter and the “Manchester Guardian,” the leading Liberal newspaper, have both had something to say on the subject. Lady Bonham Carter referred to split voting as “this disastrous incident,” and declared that without unity of purpose and unity of action in Parliament and out of it, the Liberals would get nowhere. “A large party can afford to digest a few dissentients, hut a small party which splits threatens to become the mere splinter of a splinter,” she said. “It is for this reason that the action of three Liberal members has dealt such a blow to Liberal fortunes everywhere. There is no surer way of killing a party or cause than by making it ridiculous. We all have a right to make ourselves ridiculous if we choose to, but we have no right to bring ridicule on the party to which we belong. X cannot generalise about people's consciences,. but it seems to me a conscientious nicety which enables one , to sign a motion and then not vote on it, even though you know it must be taken to a vote. It is so subtle and intricate and beyond me that I think it would be understood only by Freud.” In Sad Mess The “Manchester Guardian,” in a leading article declared: “The Liberal Party is once again in a sad mess. It is the old trouble. AH through history the party has disliked close discipline.” Commenting on Lady Violet’s speech, it said there clearly was disunion of a very fundamental sort at the top in the party. “She wants to turn the Labour Government out, and if there are any Liberals in the next House, she would have them oppose Labour. Lady Megan does not want to turn the Government out, because she thinks that under most circumstances the Labour Government is preferable to the Tory Government.” “These two points of view are to be found among Liberals everywhere. It has hitherto seemed wise not to force on the party the unpleasant duty of choosing between them. Lady Violet’s speech almost compels it, and she advertises to a cynical world that the Liberal Party is in an even more pitiable plight than most had supposed. She would contend, no doubt, that the party is more likely to survive if it comes down on her side of the wall than if it comes down on Lady Megan’s. But what most outside observers are wondering is whether to make fragile Humpty Dumpty come off the wall at all is not the surest way of ending him. <■ Old Radicalism “The old Radicalism that survives 1 in the Liberal Party has two strains. That has been noted at every point in its history over the last 60 years. Every time a choice has been forced on it by the quarrels of its leaders, the party has lost ground, either to the Left or Right. “This.will be true again. The party cannot live by logic, but it can be killed by logic, and that seems, unhappily, to be the likely effect of trying to put it on the side of the Tories in the House and at the next election, however specious electoral bargains they may offer—at a price. It will take high statesmanship to recover the ground lost in the last week. It may be the last chance.” The diplomatic correspondent of the “Sunday Times” observes that the only profit in this miserable business accrues to the Government, which sees in a continuation of the Liberal split welcome reinforcement of its weak position.

While the Government is noting this “welcome reinforcement,” last week’s by-election in the Handsworth Division of Birmingham tended to confirm the moderate but definite swing towards’ the Conservatives. It is generally accepted that in these circumstances Mr Attlee is “sitting pat,' a fact which, raised the ire of the “Daily Express.” “Mr Attlee,” says the “Express,” “appears firm in his intention to ignore growing public discontent so strikingly demonstrated in the recent by-elections. He hugs the hard hope that if only the Government can hang on to office for long enough, some miracle may happen to restore it to public favour. That is a desperate hope which now stands between Britain and a good Government.”