Britain Braced For More intense War Policy

Northern Advocate, 10 May 1940, Page 5

Britain Braced For More intense War Policy

Press Views:

(Received 1.30 p.m.) RUGBY, May 9,

Newspaper comment, not only in Britain, but in Allied and neutral countries, and even more notably in Germany itself, has been quick to realise that the real significance of the two-day debate in the House of Commons is that an intensification of Britain’s war effort will be the result. Most foreign comments were made before the announcement of the figures cf the House of Commons division.

Fighting Spirit Behind Debate. Later United States comments, however. make it clear that the outstanding lesson of the frank and fearless discussion remains unaltered by the result of the division.

It is everywhere recognised that Britain has braced herself for a more resolute prosecution of the war. The “New York Times” observes that the British people can be relied upon to push the war with more determination than ever, and the firm fighting spirit behind all the hot words of the debate will remain, no matter what trial the nation may be called upon to endure. All Want the Same. There is some division of opinion in the British Press regarding the tactics of the Opposition in pressing the debate to a division, but none on this major question. In all newspapers _ emphasis is laid on the fact that the majority and minority alike were voting for a more intense war effort, and the establishment of the most effective Cabinet machinery which can be devised to meet changing and urgent needs.

Power of Adaptation. “The Times,” while regarding it as unfortunate that the Labour Party decided to press for a division, welcomes the opportunity which the debate offered. “The power of adaptation is the essence of democratic capacity to wage war. “It was no accident that the Democracies triumphantly survived the last war and that military monarchy fell. “They showed themselves fully competent to chvose the wrr leaders they needed, and no less willing and eager, indeed, to surrender to Ihem all the authority they needed for the single aim of victoty. “It is that power of adaptation which public opinion Is now beginning to invoke with its present call for now manifestations of effective leadership in all its war activities. Profit Out of Reverse. “A free people can ring profit out of reverse —and this country, unfortunately, is never to be seen at its best, bravest and most skilful until it has encountered one. “Its imagination is hardly at work until then.” • “The Times” calls attention to Mr. Chamberlain’s plain invitation in his speech to Labour to take its share in the Government.

“If the Labour Party fails to answer the clear public call, it leaves Mr. Chamberlain more free to choose his own means of showing that the setback in Southern Norway is not merely a failure successfully extenuated, but the new starting point for British energy and valour,” “Tlie Times” says. Country Wants Firm Lead. The “Daily Telegraph” says that what the country asks is to be firmly led. and to be convinced that the greatest war effort of which the nation is capable is being marshalled and directed with unfailing efficiency and drive. The Prime Minister can provide that with a Cabinet strengthened by new blood. The “News Chronicle” demands that Mr. Chamberlain should bow to the will of the country, and that a strong Government, representative of all parties, be formed without unnecessary delay. The “Daily Mail” says the demand is for new Government reconstruction, and it .must be met. The “Daily Herald” says: “Mr. Chamberlain has worked hard and selflessly. He has done his best for us, but we have reached a stage at which his best will not do.” Earlier Reactions. An earlier message stated: The main feature of the press comment this morning, as yesterday, on the debate in the House of Commons is the insistence on all hands upon the prosecution of the war with the utmost vigour. There is no difference over the Government’s aims or its declared policy of bringing the war to a victorious conclusion. The criticism arises solely with regard to its energy and efficiency in carrying out what is the unanimous will of the nation. The conclusion reached by “The Times” may be read into most of the editorial comment, namely: “We shall not win this war with less than the whole capacity for leadership possessed by all the parties together.” The extension of Mr Churchill’s responsibilities is favourably commented on throughout the Press. In the United States, the first reactions to the Commons debate were that the Government had been saved by the party machine. In Canada the view is held that one cf the first results will be a 'further increase in Canada’s war activitir particularly those connected with aircraft. ,