Sordid Piece Of Political Jobbery”

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 October 1948, Page 8

Sordid Piece Of Political Jobbery”

Let it be noted that on September 13 our £lOOO-a-year M.P.s and our £5OOO-a-year Cabinet Ministers, together with the lesser-paid junior Ministers, met at Westminster. Stern duty called, and so our legislators had not hesitated to break their holiday, writes “Brutus” in the London Recorder.

Mr Aneurin Bevan was already back after studying in Rome the methods of Tiberius, Nero and Mussolini. Mr Morrison had returned from the South of France. . Everyone hoped that Mr Attlee, despite his unfortunate illness, enjoyed his visit to Eire. There was not expected to be much doing on the Monday. In fact, It would probably be devoted to the ceremony of proroguing the present session. As soon as that was finished the scene-shifters would take over, for on the Tuesday the Lords were to resume their tenancy, for a brief hour, over their own Chamber, which the Commons have used since 1940. The displaced M.P.s were to retire to St Stephen’s Hall to await the summons of His Majesty to hear him read the Speech from the Throne. “Unscrupulous Policy

When the ceremony was finished there would be another interlude while the scene-shifters rearranged the sets, whereupon the JLords would resume their humble tenancy, an a the M.P.s would take over their Lordships’ Chamber to. debate the King’s Speech. I would be the last person to decry the pageantry and tradition of Parliamentary procedure, but, unfortunately, the dignity and procedure of Parliament was in this case being made the tool of unscrupulous party policy. , There is every reason why Parliament should meet at this time. Indeed, Parliament would be wise to consider whether the long summer recess is possible any more in a modern and very troubled world. That is why the House was merely adjourned and not prorogued at the end of July, so that it could be summoned in case of emergency. Certainly Parliament should now hear statements on the foreign situation and the nation’s economic condition, and debate them. And, having concluded their deliberations, the M.P.s should go on holiday again with the House still adjourned. jßut why was Parliament to meet. Why was the session being prorogued on the Monday? Why was there an official opening of the new session on the Tuesday instead of the traditional opening in November? , The answer is very simple, and can best, as well as most appropriately, be described in the slang ot the underworld: “The Socialists have pulled a fast one.” Here is the Story Here is the story: The Socialists want to get their hands on the steel industry before the electorate throws Once the State has bought out the steel holdings the Socialists will rely on the overworked but useful bromide that you cannot unscramble an egg. Therefore a Tory Government would have, to take over a national economy dominated in all essentials by nationalisation, and therefore rendering free enterprise almost impossible except as an adjunct to State control. . The Socialists know that the majority of the steel workers are against nationalisation. The Socialists realise that the steel industry , has long set a pace which has won the admiration of the whole world. The Socialists are aware that steel is the strong base on which a great new era of industrial partnership under free enterprise could be launched.

The Socialists see clearly that they cannot survive unless they drag sieei down into the nationalisation bog. “Night or Blucher!” growled Wellington at Waterloo. “Steel or oblivion!” shout the Socialists They are realists these rulers of ours, when it comes to matters of personal survival. Election Would Intervene Then why did not the Government wait until November and, in the new session, introduce a Bill to nationalise steel? The reason is obvious. They feared that the House of Lords, speaking for the nation and utilising its established delaying powers of two years, would throw the Bill out, and an election would intervene. This, of corirse, could not be tolerated. The very idea that the Upper Chamber should delay a measure so that at a general election the people would have a chance to declare upon it, was something that no true democrat could swallow fot ari instant. How can you have Government of j;he people by th: Socialists for Transport House if the established procedure of Parliament is to stand in the way of party advantage? “We are the rulers now,” said Sir Hartley Shawcross in the Commons. In the Socialist ideology Abraham Lincoln is as out of date as the brontosaurus. Just to make certain that the party shall be above the Parliamentary executive it is Mr Morgan Phillips, who is not in Parliament at all, who summons M.P.s to account for their conduct as constituency representatives. Collaboration of Lords So the Party determined that, since the HoUse of Lords might dare to use the powers conferred upon it by the Constitution, its powers should be curbed. And this was decided upon before the Upper Chamber had expressed any opinion on the nationalisation of steel. Under the leadership of Lord Salisbury the Opposition majority in the Upper House had won tributes from Socialist Ministers over and over again for the way in which the Lords had collaborated with the Government in carrying through Socialist legislation. Their reward was the Parliament Bill, which was to reduce the delaying powers of the Upper Chamber to one year instead of two and would thus allow the Government to get hold of steel before the country had' a chance to vote upon the issue. That is why Parliament was to meet—not to deal with any ; of the pressing problems which beset the nation (although they would come under brief discussion) but to assist in sheer, sordid, political jobbery. The Speech from the Throne, the moving and seconding of an Address to His Majesty, the re-arranging of the two Houses for the occasion and all the dignity of Parliamentary Tradition were to be made the trollop of Socialist lust for power.

Not in its Manifesto

I hoped that Tory Opposition would hot be numbed by procedure and debate this as a normal measure. It is not the right or wrong of nationalising steel which is the-real issue. What has to be decided is whether or not a Government can alter the procedure of Parliament in order to permit the railroadng of a measure which was not in its electoral manifesto but which will ensure the grip of the party on a vital section of the nation even if the party is hurled from office. •