§ 2.47 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess the Leader of the House the following Question: when he proposes to make a statement, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, on the policy and legislative programme of the new Government?
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)My Lords, there does not appear to me to be any necessity for any special statement. The aims of the Government's policy differ in no way from those of the previous Administration, and we stand by the legislative programme set out in the gracious Speech which was delivered on Tuesday, 6th November last.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I must say that not only some of us on this side of the House but millions throughout the country will be amazed at the complacency of Her Majesty's Government in dealing with this important question. On December 11 and 12 we had two days of debate to obtain a vote of confidence in the Government as it then existed. That Government resigned. There was a change of Prime Minister; seven new Cabinet Ministers have been appointed; there are fifty-two offices in the Government service which are now occupied by Ministers who did not occupy those particular chairs before. There never has been, in my long Parliamentary experience, such a situation arising, especially when it is remembered that the real cause of the resignation of the Government was not only what we all regretted, the health of the Prime Minister, but the breakdown of the Suez policy. There would not have been such a major reconstruction in the new Government of the offices concerned if that had not been the case. We feel, therefore, that it would have been wiser of the Government to remember the words of the noble Earl the Deputy Leader of the House on December 12, when he was rather—I will not say shocked at our suggestion for an Election at that time, but when he said that we ought to beware, because they might take us at our word. Well, it is not we who are running. We are waiting for the 168 proper decision which ought to be taken in any democracy in such extraordinary circumstances—that is, to lay it before the court and the judgment of the people.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, before the Leader of the House replies, I wonder whether one who perhaps has an even longer experience in both Houses than the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition might (I do not know whether it was a question he was putting) put a question to the Leader of the House. Is it not a fact that not only in all our political experience, but in the whole history of this country for at least 150 years, it has been a commonplace for Governments to change, for a new Prime Minister to take over, as in the case of Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, who took over, or continued, the noble Viscount's Government—I cannot remember whether in fact the noble Viscount was a member of that Government.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I was.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONAnd was the noble Viscount a member of our National Government?
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONThe noble Viscount was defeated at the Election.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, will the noble Earl pardon an interruption? Perhaps he has forgotten that Mr. Ramsay MacDonald could not possibly have held down the job had he not gone to the country almost immediately.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, on the contrary, with great respect, I will take the noble Viscount up on that point. The country fully endorsed him. He held the job down perfectly well and, as everyone will remember, we introduced a Budget.
Is it not a fact that these are matters not of Party politics but of constitutional importance, and that on successive occasions we see the pattern: in the resignation of Lord Salisbury and the succession of Mr. Balfour; in Mr. Bonar Law's resignation and his succession by Mr. Baldwin; then in the succession of Mr. Baldwin to Mr. MacDonald, and the 169 succession of Mr. Chamberlain to Mr. Baldwin. I am not quite sure but I think the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, was lucky, and carried on: he is the one exception to the rule. Throughout the last century at least, that is the pattern. Her Majesty's Government are following what has become the absolutely normal course followed by all Governments and all Parliaments.
§ EARL ATTLEEMy Lords, may I adduce one or two instances against the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, as he has given us such a long statement. Your Lordships will remember that Mr. MacDonald's Government was formed to keep us on the gold standard; they promptly went off the gold standard and there was a General Election. Here vie have very much the same thing, because the aims of Her Majesty's Government have been completely frustrated. Her Majesty's Government having failed entirely to meet their aims by their methods, it is now presumed that, after the disasters we have already had, the newcomer will take some other method.
§ THE, MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I am sorry to disagree with almost everything that has been said by the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough. First of all, Her Majesty's Government did not resign. What happened was that the Prime Minister became ill and had to tender his resignation, and in the ordinary constitutional method, the other Ministers tendered their resignations at the same time; but they did not resign on a question of policy. I am glad to have the opportunity of saying that it had nothing whatever to do with the Suez policy. I do not expect the noble Viscount to share cur view, but I can assure him that we do not accept his view on that particular point. Regarding his point that there were a great many new Ministers, that is quite true. That often happens when there is a readjustment of a Government, what is now called a "reshuffle", whether or not we have a new Prime Minister. But the subject of a statement in Parliament is not that of the Ministers; it is a matter of their policy, and the policy is the same as before.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, that only fills us with greater gloom than ever, because what we really need, in the present state 170 of the country, is the possibility of moving forward in something like unity and confidence. Here we face an entirely new situation, as a result of a disastrous Suez policy which does not end merely with a loss of prestige in foreign and diplomatic circles but also confronts us with a very heavy bill and with a danger of growing unemployment, and which, it seems, is to lead to an entire readjustment of our defence measures. It seems to me to have been incumbent on Her Majesty's Government, in these circumstances, at least to make a statement to Parliament, which represents the people, as to what the situation is. That is why I was asking the Question to-day.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, the noble Viscount says that we should move forward in unity. It is not the fault of Her Majesty's Government that there was no unity. The behaviour of the Leaders of the Opposition has shocked the whole country. That is certainly true.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, on other points I can only repeat that if a Government continues a policy on which it is already embarked there is no necessity for a special statement of policy. It has already been made. If the noble Viscount is dissatisfied on this or that aspect of policy, he and his Party can always put down a Motion upon it or, if they wish, a Motion of censure which we shall be very glad to face at any time. But certainly there is no obligation on Her Majesty's Government to make a statement; indeed, there would be no new statement that they could make.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, if we cannot get what we want here we must make our own appeal, as we shall almost every week, to the country, and there we shall find a different feeling, as we shall at the Election.