Labour Leadership Rivals

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30044, 31 January 1963, Page 8

Labour Leadership Rivals

(BV SIMON KAVANAUGH] LONDON, Jan. 25. Britain’s next Prime Minister may be a former Oxford tutor and civil servant or the son of a lorry driver’s mate from Peabody Buildings. Harold Wilson, reflective, who speaks with calm authority, and George Brown, ebullient, who regards and calls everyone “brother,” are the two leading contenders to follow Hugh Gaitskell as leader of the Labour Party.

With the dump in the Government’s fortunes, who* ever is chosen to lead Labour could well find himself within a year leading the country. Labour members of Parliament, who elect the leader, could hardly have two men so different to choose from. This difference is there for all to see in the way each conducts'himself in political 1 * Wilson will sit calmly puffing his pipe, listening to arguments he thinks completely wrong without giving so much as a look to betray his feelings. When the time comes -he will let himself into the discussion with a "Well of course . . .’’ and go on to day an argument with masterly economy of phrase. George Brown does not ease open the door. His most celebrated outburst came at the Labour Party dinner given to Mr Khrushchev and Marshal Bulganin on their 1956 visit. After being the soul of diplomacy and toasting Mr Khrushchev as the biggest union boss of all, Mr Brown could not allow the Russion leader’s remark that before the war Britain threw the Germans at Russia to peap without comment. # His comment wu£_*rew God forgive you,” Cballenged by Mr Khrushchev, he went on to lecture the Russian leader on shortcomings in past and present Communist policy. The shaken Mr Khrushchev declared that if he were British he would be a Conservative, because of George Brown. Some felt that this would finish Brown’s political career. But he survived it and rows within the party to become in 1960 deputy to Gaitskell. He has done so be-

cause of his strong union backing and through two personal, qualities—honesty and Whatever George Brown has to say and however he says it, his words are born of honest conviction. This honesty shows through in the sheer endeavour be has shown on behalf of the Labour Party. It also led him to have doubts on whether he had the ability to stand for the deputy leadership of the party. Ptaty Unity He is a loyalist and a recurring theme of his speeches within the party has been that at unity. He Is seen as the man Who has worked for the party rather than for high office and has said that he was staggered to get as "SAMKK’k, his critics to be ah ambitious opportunist When Hugh Gaitskell was fighting for political survival in 1960, Mr Wilson challenged him in a battle for leadership of the party. Last year he and Mr Brown fought for the deputy leadership. Wilson has the reputatim of being a man who plays his cards close to big chest waiting to see what others lay before revealing his trump. He does admit to being ambitious. But it OOttld be the ambition of a man who feels that he could reader the party and the country a service. Bevan Follower He has stood by his principles to the extent of resigning from Presidency at the Board of Trade in foe first post-war Labour Government when he dmaoreed wifo foe budgetary policy. And. as « Bevanite he again cut himself Off from the mainstream of the party. George Brown is normally to be found with the majority. Early in his cares? he was regarded as something of a rebel, but foe party conference of 1939 saw him, a 25-year-old union official. passtonateft appoaW expulsion at Sfe Stafford "fe-Lsbour Party, being a gathering of those who want ■o*7 • mend WmiSmS Groups are labelled Left, fled and over-emphasised—-and not only by those outside foe party. George Brown, for instance, lays far

more stress on public ownership than would be regarded as normal right-of-centre thinking.

"Because thia is so vital an election for Labour, such tags ta Right .and Left will not be the only consideration. The party will want to choose the -man who commands most respect from his immediate v colleagues, throughout the party generally and throughout the country. Both men have this quality, but through different ways. George Brown can inspire. He was born into socialism and at 16 was a street-corner orator. He met his wife at a Labour hostel and courted her while they canvassed at a by-election. He can have Mazing rows with people, but retain their friendship. ■ Mtenee Bptß jO The instance which underlined Mr Brown’s value to foe party came in foe defence-split, which saw Labour rent down the middle between those who said Britain Should have foe Hbomb and those who said she shouldn’t. Mr Brown feels that Britain should have the bomb, but has every respect for a man like Frank Cousins, one of the most powerful of the anti-bomb group. He says he understands how Cousins reaches his View and the friendship of, the rivo men is in no way « was George Brown’s speech at the Labour Party conference of 1961 which did so much to unify foe. party after the big defence split of the previous year. The passion which inspired foe delegates was Brown'* The man who did much to help him formulate the pMtey waa Harold Wflaon. Mr Wilson is an ideas man, « Socialist intellectual of foe classical mould-gram-mar school,: scholarship to Oxford, a First m Modern Greste, a tutorsbfo, war-time Hels Abrilliant economist and during fae war when he atfoeMtntetoy o£ Fuel and Power he was hailed ae a boy wonder. His biSk. “Haw Deal for Coal** became'.foe blueprint for the Labour , - Government's nationalisation of the mines. BAt 31, he -res President of fie Board of Trade, an office I filled with extreme _effiency. He is an excellent speaker in Parliament. The major problems facing Britain today concern economics and foreigns affairs—in that order. Two points in Harold WQsonre favour are that he is an expert in both—in that order.