MR CHURCHILL’S SUGGESTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25851, 23 May 1945, Page 5

MR CHURCHILL’S SUGGESTION

CONTINUANCE OF COALITION

RUGBY, May 21,

The Prime Minister, Mr Churchill, has addressed the following letter to the leader of the Labour Party, Mr C. R. Attlee: —

“ Dear Mr Attlee, —From talks I have had with you and your principal Labour colleagues, I have gathered the impression that the Labour Party, instead of leavin? the Government on the defeat of Germany, would be willing to continue the Coalition until the autumn. I have given the most careful and anxious thought to this suggestion, and I regret to say that in its present form I cannot feel it would be in the public interest. A union of parties like that which now exists should come together and work together, not for a particular date without regard to world events, but for the achievement of a great national purpose transcending all party differences. For the past five or six months our Ministerial and parliamentary affairs have been increasingly affected by the assumed approach of the general election at the end of the German war. This has not been conducive to the national interest so far as domestic affairs are concerned. Appeal to Carry On

“ I therefore make you the following proposal, which I earnestly hope you not readily reject—namely, that ■we snould fix upon another object for your endeavour and leave the question of our separation until it is gained. The First Lord of the Admiralty has already expressed in his speech in the City of London his regret that a general election should. be held before the Japanese war is finished. It would give me a great relief if you and your friends were found resolved to carry On with us until decisive victory has been gained over Japan. “In the meanwhile we would together do our utmost to implement the proposals for social security which we have laid before Parliament. On this basis we could work together with the energy which has marked our long and honourable association. I am conscious, however, in the highest degree, of our duty to' strengthen ourselves if you would decide to stand in with us all united together until the Japanese surrender is compelled. Let us discuss the means of taking the nation’s opinion—for example, by referendum—whether in these conditions the life of Parliament should be further prolonged. “I am sending letters in similar terms to Sir Archibald Sinclair (Leader of the Liberal Party) and to Mr Ernest Brown (Leader of the Liberal National Party).” The Prime Minister’s proposals have met with favourable response from Mr Archibald Sinclair and Mr Brown. Sir Archibald said the Liberal Party was ■willing to continue under Mr Churchill’s leadership. “It seems to us,” he said, “that the situation in Europe, which the Foreign Secretary described In Parliament on Thursday as urgent and grave, and numerous other matters would justify that course.” Sir Archibald added that many members of his party had already scattered to their homes, but he would consult them as soon as possible. Mr Brown also promised the support of the Liberal National Party until the defeat of Japan. “My Liberal National friends and I have regretted the events which have seemed to make for a premature of the present Government,” he wrote. “We shall be glad to do all in our power to support you in your heavy responsibilities until the victory over Japan.” ... ; Labour Conference Debate

Referendum Not Favoured

The proposals in Mr Churchill’s letter were debated at a private session of the Labour Party conference at Blackpool this afternoon. One correspondent says the debate was “lively,” and so far as could be gathered a large number of the delegates were prepared to back the executive decision and accept what they regarded as the challenge of the Prime Minister. If this should be the ultimate decision of the conference, adds the correspondent, it will mean that Labour will be ready to go to the country as an independent party with its own programme at any date that may be decided by Mr Churchill. Another correspondent says that at the secret session of the conference only two 'delegates voted in favour of the' Labour Ministers continuing in the 'Government to the end of the war with Japan. A statement issued by the Labour Party Executive says that a fair and square thing would be to have the election in the autumn. An attempt to rush the election now was a deliberate attempt to exploit-victory and the personality of the Prime Minister in the interests of the Conservaives.' The executive , considered the session should go to its normal end, and outstanding and important legislation should be passed, including the Family Allowances Bill, the Allocation of Industry Bill, and another called the Supplies and Powers Bill, which enabled the Government to continue economic controls for the purposes of peace in accordance with the wish of any Government that might be in power. While the war with Japan would have the fullest support of the Labour Party, whether in or out of office, it was certain that a number of economic and social problems would come along on which there would be wide difference between the Conservatives and Labour. Mr Attlee’s Reply Mr Attlee, in a reply to the Prime Minister’s letter, says: “I have, with my colleagues, given the most careful consideration to the . proposals which you make. The Labour Party, on enter ng the Government, set no particular date for the termination of the partnership, ft has, however, been recognised that the general election must necessarily bring the partnership to an end. if the electors are to have full and free opportunity to express their views on future policy. The need for bringing to an end, when conditions allowed, a Parliament, the life of which has already been prolonged year after year, has been recognised by ail of us, and by no one more emphatically .than yourself. You stated that the prolongation of the life of the existing Parliament by another two or three years would be a very serious constitutional lapse. The increasing success of our arms warranted you, when personally introducing the last Prolongation of Parliament Bill, to assume the probability of the defeat of Germany.” Mr. Attlee recalled that Mr Churchill had said that the termination of the war with Germany would fix the date for the general election. The political parties had shared Mr Churchill’s faith in the end of the European war this year, and had consequently regarded the present session as the last of the present Parl'ament. “ it has been the view of the Labour Party, which, I think, you share,” he said, “that a rushed election like that of 1918 before the electorates, and especially those serving overseas, had had the first opportunity of considering the policies, would be utterly wrong and would gravely weaken the authority of any Government resulting from such an election at a time when public confidence would be especially necessary. It is for that reason my colleagues and I have always held that there should be an interval between the time when the conditions permitted the election to be held and the election “ Recognising the possibility of prejudice to the party holding power during th : s interim we have been prepared to share the responsibilities of Government up to the time when the election was declared. An autumn election would provide a more complete effective register than that now in force, and would give to service candidates a. fair chance of making themselves known to the electors.

“My colleagues and I do not share your view that the country’s interests would be prejudiced by a continuance of the present Government until the autumn; on the contrary, we think there would be a great advantage in the Government, which has successfully brought the nation through the war, continuing for a short time in order to deal with the immediate problems of the San Francisco Conference. We can rely on our members in the House to do all they can to maintain this unity. We therefore consider that a fair and just solution of the problem is an election in autumn.

“You suggest as an alternative that we should continue together until the end of the Japanese war. It is unnecessary for me to assure you that whether in or out of the Government Labour will give its fullest support to the war until. Japan is defeated. But when this will be is uncertain. We hope it will be soon, but if it were to be prolonged we see arising in much more acute form all those difficulties which you apprehend at the present time in the domestic sphere and which you give as an objection to continuing to the autumn.

“It is precisely on the problems of reconstruction and the economic life of this country that party differences are most acute. What is required is decisive action. This can only be forthcoming from, a Government united on principles and policy. A Government so divided that it could take no effective action would be a disaster to the country. My colleagues and I do not believe it would be possible to lay aside political controversy now that the expectation of the election has engaged the attenton of the country. To give a guarantee of an agreement to carry on for an indefinite period is not in my power, nor, I suggest, in yours.

“I do not think it would be right or possible to obtain from Parliament another prolongation of its life. I could not consent to the introduction into our national life of a device so alien to all our traditions as a referendum, which only too often has been the instrument of Nazism and Fascism. Hitler’s practices in the fields of referenda and plebiscites can hardly have endeared these expedients to British hearts. The proposal, for the reason I have given you, is unacceptable. It has been my desire, publicly expressed, that the long and honourable association of parties in Government, which brought the country through so many perils to victory under your leadership, loally supported by your Labour colleagues, should be brought to an end by common agreement .without controversy. I am sure this would be your wish, but I am bound to state that the reasons for rejecting an autumn election seem to me based not on national interests but bn considerations of party expediency. “It appears to me that you are departing from the position of national leader by yielding to the pressure of the Conservative Party, which is anxious to exploit your own great service to the nation in its own interests. I would earnestly ask you to reconsider your decision to hold an election under circumstances which are bound to cause bitter resentment among the fighting services. Should you, however, decide to hold an election in July, in spite of all the disadvantages to the electors set out m this letter, the responsibility must and will, of course, be yours.”