GENERAL ELECTION LACKED FIRE

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30733, 24 April 1965, Page 15

GENERAL ELECTION LACKED FIRE

(Special Crspdt. N.ZPA.) LONDON, April 23. “A tired election,” is how David Butler, of Nuffield College, and Anthony King, of Magdalen College, Oxford, describe Britain’s 1964 election in a full-scale study published by Nuffield College. “On all sides ammunition had been fired off for over a year, and it was hard to find fresh supplies,” they say. “Neither Sir Alec DouglasHome’s traditional style nor Mr Wilson’s insistent exhibition of his own personality was altogether appropriate to the circumstances of the 1964 election.” Sir Alec Douglas-Home en-

trusted far too much of the general campaign strategy to his lieutenants, Mr Wilson not enough. It was a case of the diffident general versus the one-man band. Neither succeeded in overcoming the sense of anticlimax which hung heavily over the campaign. By the beginning of the last week, the whole proceedings had developed into a tiresome ritual enacted before a bored and weary electorate. One comment on the book is that it may revive controversy over Sir Alec Doug-las-Home’s performance as leader of the Conservative Party. “When all was over, some Conservatives were willing to say privately that Sir Alec Douglas-Home cost them the election,” it says. “They gave him credit for rallying the party’s morale

during his year in office, and for his deferment of the general election, and for his insistence on holding the May by-elections. “But, they said, his performance during the campaign was inadequate. He never showed himself master of the television screen, the press conference, or the set platform speech. “He and his advisers decided that he should spend his time on a nation-wide wh£stle-stop tour. He undoubtedly received a favourable response, particularly in country areas, but his whistlestop speeches developed few new themes and were seldom newsworthy. “A Prime Minister’s words during an election can seldom have attracted less attention. “He made a virtue of going out to meet the people, but, since he cannot have met

I more than 1 per cent of them, > it is doubtful if this was as ; rewarding a use of his time - as his supporters suggested. In fact, in mid-campaign, he • discussed changing his plans. “The Conservative efforts > plainly suffered because their • leader was not visibly in com- : mand. In fact, Sir Alec t Douglas-Home was in daily touch with the Conservative - managers in London (all though he probably did not • play a decisive role in any ■ of the main campaign deds- - ions). i “But he was unable to - make the fullest public im- ( pact, partly because he had i no special flair for the quotable platform riposte, and s partly because his schedule i denied him the opportunity.” Of Mr Wilson it is re- ’ marked that he is not by , nature a self-critical polit tician.