A Stronger Cabinet in Britain

Southland Times, Issue 24249, 5 October 1940, Page 4

A Stronger Cabinet in Britain

I WHE resignation of Mr Chamber- | J- lain will not cause surprise in ■ London political circles, where for i some time past it has been discussed ; as a probable, and on the whole de- : sirable, step in the interests of national unity. Speculation grew ! bolder when it became known that his health was not good, and it was generally expected that his recent operation would be partly the cause of. and partly the pretext for, his reI tirement from the War Cabinet. I History must be left to pass a final I judgment on Mr Chamberlain as a I statesman. As the leader of the api peasement group he was admired and revered by millions who believed that he was preventing a world war, and who later remained convinced that he had at least postponed the struggle until Britain was more ready to sustain it. He was also fiercely criticized by others (a smaller group that grew rapidly in numbers after Munich) who insisted that by allowing himself to be tricked by the dictators he had removed the last chance of peace. Later events have certainly shown that Hitler’s character and intentions had been grossly underestimated in the circles dominated by Mr Chamberlain. Moreover, the first phase of the war, during which the appeasement Cabinet remained in power (with merely minor adjustments) was conducted with a lack of energy and vision that had disastrous results when the Norwegian campaign, and later the assault on France, revealed the inadequacy of preparation. These things could not be forgotten when Mr Churchill came into power. Many critics argued that the new Prime Minister was making a mistake in keeping Mr Chamberlain, who was still leader of the Conservative Party, at his right hand in the War Cabinet. It was also claimed that the War Cabinet had been assembled with more attention to its unifying function than to the need for utilizing the best administrative talent available. In August, when Lord Beaverbrook was admitted to the inner Cabinet, The Economist declared that the War Cabinet was the least satisfactory part of Mr Churchill’s Government. “It was not chosen for its merits,” said the journal, “but for its politics; and it will be definite progress if the advent of Lord Beaverbrook presages the supersession of the most important politicians by the most able men.”

Imnortant Changes

That there were grounds for this criticism seems evident from the fact that Mr Churchill has taken advantage of Mr Chamberlain’s resignation to make important ch. ,ges in both Cabinets. The most interesting recruits to the inner circle of policy makers are Sir John Anderson and Mr Ernest Bevin. From the point of view of publicity, Sir John Anderson has probably been the quietest of all Cabinet Ministers. He makt r no radio speeches, and few speeches of any kind. But his reputation as an administrator has been steadily growing, and he is obviously one of the strongest men in the Government. Mr Ernest Bevin is a more colourful personality, and his admission to the War Cabinet indicates that his work as Minister of Labour has revealed a genuine capacity for leadership. Only two members of the Chamberlain War Cabinet (apart from Mr Churchill) now remain in office; and it is the retention of Lord Halifax

and Sir Kingsley Wood that may provide the widest scope for criticism in London. Lord Halifax is an impressive figure, and no one doubts his complete integrity of purpose. But he has not been conspicuously successful as Foreign Secretary, and with the probable extension of the war the department under his control seems to require a more dynamic and skilful Minister. The most interesting, and puzzling, of the other changes is Mr Herbert Morrison’s appointment as Home Secretary—the post vacated by Sir- John Anderson. It is true, of course, that the intensive air raids have raised many and difficult problems which give the portfolio a new importance. But the Ministry of Supply is one of the key positions, and it was confidently expected that Mr Morrison would prove equal to its heavy responsibilities. His removal to another post suggests either that he has not fulfilled expectations, or that he has found it difficult to secure the co-operation of the industrialists. Under the emergency regulations he was able to use wide powers, and his interpretation of war-time requirements may have been too drastic. On this point, however, there can be no certainty until fuller information is available. Among the minor changes the appointment of Lord Cranborne as Dominions Secretary should cause most interest and satisfaction in this part of the world. As Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs under Mr Eden, Lord Cranborne proved himself an uncompromising enemy of appeasement. His speech made after resigning in 1938 was described by one who heard it in the House of Commons as more powerful than Mr Eden’s, and he was one of the few Conservative members who denounced the Munich agreement in open debate. The return of this younger statesman is one more sign that Mr Churchill is feeling his way towards a first-class Cabinet.