Sharp Criticism Of U.K. Leaders

Press, Volume C, Issue 29682, 28 November 1961, Page 10

Sharp Criticism Of U.K. Leaders

(Special Correspondent N.Z.PJI.)

LONDON, November 27. The British Government's prestige fell sharply last week. On both its “pay pause” policy and its Immigration Bill it drew general criticism tor ineptitude and fumbling. The fact that three leading members of the Government were directly involved did not help matter®—the Prime Minister, Mr Macmillan, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Selwyn Lloyd, in the pay pause, and the Home Secretary, Mr R. A. Butler, in the Immigration Bill. In'both cases the Government not only provoked a raking broadside from the Opposition, and more particu&riy from the the T.UjC. on the pay pause fiasco after the award by the Electricity Council; it also stirred anger and some dismay in'the Conservative > Party and drew sharp criticism from sections of the press which normally support the Government The pay pause, which Mr Lloyd introduced with other measures when sterling ran into difficulties, was imposed without consultations with the trade unions. It has been heartily disliked and fought, notably by school teachers. But the Government gave every sign of maintaining it and insisting that it was necessary in view of the state of Britain’s economy, “Bungled Timing” When the award, of the Electricity Council was announced, it was as much the apparent lack of liaison between a nationalised industry—the Electricity Council — as the breaking of the pause that caused the resulting storm to engulf Mr Lloyds Although the Prime Minister stepped in, rebuked the chairman of the council and admitted that the pause had been given a set-back but that it would continue, criticisms were not checked. They included ‘The Times” accusing Mr Lloyd of bungled timing and lack of imagination and saying it was the job of the Government to govern. The “Economist” commented; “The Government deserves the deepest censure tor its contribution to the electricity wages surrender; it is no good the Prime Minister wringing his hands like an impotent Pontius Pilate and saying it was impossible for him and his Cabinet colleagues to avert it.” The future of wage claims remains uncertain, but the Government has shown it will continue to resist them by rejecting a pay rise for the Transport and General Workers* Union and the National Union of General and Municipal Workers. This has led to forecasts that its decision has made strike action likely. Tbe situation has raised questions about the future of Mr Lloyd. He is said to have reached a crisis in his career. Mr Butler is under fire for his handling of the Immigration Bill and for not working out its implications. He has run into trouble over Irish immigrants. It is said he must have known the controls would not apply to the Irish for administrative and political reasons. “XJnhaiy Meas” As a result, the bill hra become what is variously termed a “tangle,” an “unholy mess” and a “straight out colour bar.” This has allowed not only the Oppoai-

tian, but also Right-wing Conservatives, to weigh in with claims about Empiredissolving policies. It has also brought Mir Macmillan and Mr Gaitskell into collision with what has been described as a “cold fury that astonished MP ’s” over consultation with Commonwealth Governments, notably with Sir Grantley Adams, Prime Minister of the West Indies Federation. Their exchanges, which ended amid uproar and intervention by the Speaker, included a suggestion by Mr Macmillan that Mr Gaitskell was sitting on the fence and an invitation to him to say the return of a Labour Government would mean an immediate repeal of the new immigration law. It is Mr Butler, however, who is the main object of criticism and it is being said that either Mr Butler or his advisers were guilty of amazing incompetence in handling the bill. It seems astonishing that so soon after the buoyant and triumphant party conference, the Conservatives should have got themselves into tbe shallows over control of their own party in Parliament.