EDEN CRITICISED FOR LACK OF LEADERSHIP

Press, Volume XCIII, Issue 27858, 5 January 1956, Page 13

EDEN CRITICISED FOR LACK OF LEADERSHIP

(Special Correspondent N.Z.P.A.)

(Rec. 10 p.m.) LONDON, January 4. The New Year is beginning ■ rather badly for Sir Anthony Eden and his Cabinet. They are the subject of a rumble of criticism from their supporters. Just how deep is the note can be estimated when the “Daily Telegraph.” perhaps the staunchest of all supporters of the Government, devotes two articles to wttat amounts to a post-mortem on the high hopes held for the new Government immediately after the General Election last May. “There is a mood of anti-climax because the nettles have not been grasped.” says one article. “There is a favourite gesture of the Prime Ministers which, is sometimes recalled to illustrate this sense of disappointment. To emphasise a point, he will clench one fist to smack the open palm of his other hand—but the smack is seldom heard. Most Conservatives and almost certainly some of the wisqr trade union leaders are waiting to feel the smack of firm government.” The actual criticisms fall under three heads, the “Daily Telegraph” says. They are: changes of mind by the Government, half-measures and the postponement of decisions.

“Foreign affairs have caused less comment than policy at Home. But those who follow them closely have been dismayed by the hesitation and lack of clarity over Cyprus, by the determination to offer a soft answer to Marshal Bulganin and Mr Khrushchev and by the clumsy courtship of unfriendly and fickle Arab statesmen. These complaints are being rpade not by the Government’s opponents, but by its supporters, chieflv because the Government has failed to show that it can choose clearly and’ decisively between excessive claims on the national resources.

“Again and again, Mr Butler warned us that the nation is trying to do too much. People therefore expect him or the Prime Minister to tell us where the effort must be concentrated and

where claims and commitments must be trimmed.

“That is what ordinary people mean when they ask for more leadership from No. 10 Downing Street; but such leadership cannot be given unless priorities have been reviewed and sacrifices planned and decisions taken. There can be no great economies in State expenditure without major changes of policy—whether in defence, in the social services, in capital investment at Home and abroad, or in colonial development. Many have argued that it is the duty of the Government, while the next election is still far off. to tackle the problem in the spirit of being as well hanged for a sheep as a lamb. In other words, if Ministers are going to be unpopular anyhow, then make great, not small demands, on the public.” The “Daily Telegraph” continues: “Some of the criticism now being heard obviously does less than justice to the difficulty facing any man who has to succeed Sir Winston Churchill. Very few of us are bulldogs and collies cannot growl like a bulldog. “Eut Sir Anthony Eden can hardly ignore three criticisms that are made of his leadership: first, that he is. relying too much in Home affairs on the technique of smoothing and fixing, which are the essence of skilled diplomacy: second, that he is not cultivating Mr Attlee’s superb disregard for personal popularity; and third, that he looks too much over the shoulder of his Foreign Secretary. “In a very few months, the Government. although confronted with a divided Labour Party in a tame House of Commons, has lost prestige and repute. A collection of able men with plenty of ideas before them and administrative experience behind . them have failed to develop the cohesion and thrust of a good team. In his new position. Mr Butler should have more time to help with the captaincy; but spirit and strategy can be created only by the Prime Minister himself.” it says.