§ 3.18 p.m.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, this is the time when I usually raise questions of Business. I want to do something which I very much hesitate to do, and did not want to do, and that is to raise the question of how we, as a Socialist Opposition, are to be treated in future in this House and what exactly we are to make of the speech of the Prime Minister last night. I know he has felt very vexed about certain statements made in connection with quite another matter, but when he says,
I have always known that the Socialists were too dangerous to allow them to form a Government",then makes reference to their present position as an Opposition, and then says that there is only one thing to be done: that they must be voted out of public life, as a result of which they would not be able to do any more harm, I 712 think those words require a little explanation in Parliament.We as an Opposition had great friendship with the Prime Minister in this House. I think we worked with him very well. We appreciated his qualities as Foreign Secretary, as Secretary of State at the Commonwealth Relations Office, and as Leader of this House; but we are Socialists and we have served in Government after Government. We served for more than nine years in a Labour Government. We were the balancing factor which, in May, 1940, made Sir Winston Churchill Prime Minister. And we left to the present Government a state of organised defence forces without precedent in the history of our country in peace time.
I resent tremendously the implication of the Prime Minister's words, and I should like to know still further whether the real aim behind it is to lead to single-Party Government. We must know where the Prime Minister stands in relation to those with whom he has worked, and worked successfully, who are Socialists, in this House and elsewhere. This kind of statement cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. If, therefore, the reply is that all these statements are justified and form the opinion of the Conservative Government, then, of course, we shall have to look to see how we organise our position.
§ THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD CARRINGTON)My Lords, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister was seeking to make, and I thought made very clearly, the point that if the policy which has been followed over the frigates for Spain is indicative of the sort of policy that a Labour Government would follow, it would be too dangerous for us as a country to have a Labour Government. My Lords, I do not think that the noble Earl the Leader of the Opposition need be too frightened of his position. I would remind him that even if the entire Labour Party opposite me disappeared from this House, which on personal grounds I should greatly regret, we should still have the Liberal Party as an Opposition.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, let me say at once, with regard to the reference of the 713 Leader of the House to the Spanish armaments interest, that I wonder what would have been said if at any time there had been a Labour Government in power which had made part of its policy the supply of armaments whenever requested by a Communist Power. What would have been said? There would have been just as much criticism as may have been made in this case with regard to the supply of armaments to a Fascist State. Surely, therefore, the basis of comparison has been quite unfair in this matter.
The position of the Opposition in the future will have to be very largely affected by what the Prime Minister says to the country from time to time on matters and issues like this. I want that to be clearly understood. At any rate, those of us who have served not only in Labour Governments but right through the last Great War in the defence of our country resent, and resent bitterly, the implication that the Socialists should be voted, not out of the next Election but out of public life. That is what he said. We have as much right to be in public life in this democracy as any other section of it.
LORD REAMy Lords, may I point out that the Party for whom I speak have been in Opposition far longer than either of the other Parties. Therefore, we are far more experienced, and in our experience we find that when General Elections come along things of this sort are apt to be said. Would not the noble Lord the Leader of the House also agree that both the larger Parties, in their heart of hearts, would welcome a one-Party system?
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, there is something in what the noble Lord said with which I agree, but I do not think I would agree with his last observation. The fact remains that, owing to some of the things that have been said by members of the Opposition, a very large order indeed has been lost, with an even greater potential. It seems to me that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister was perfectly right, and perfectly entitled to point out that if the Opposition had been more responsible in what they said, this would not have happened.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, the Prime Minister holds the most responsible posi- 714 tion in the country, and, therefore he, at any rate, should be the most responsible in his speeches. I think I have clearly indicated to the House that he was quite irresponsible in his references to Socialism in general in this country to-day, and about what his intentions are. I might say to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, that the Liberal Party certainly have a long experience—I give them that credit—but perhaps this is the worst type of attack on a political Party that we have had since the days when Sir Winston Churchill made his famous speech as a Liberal. He said then that the Tory Party was the Party of vested interests, with corruption at home and aggression abroad to cover it up; with dear food for the millions and cheap labour for the millionaires, and all that kind of thing. We know all about that. But in this case this is trying to vote Socialism out of public life. We have as much right to be in this democracy as any other.
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, I really do not think I ought to let the noble Earl, much as we all respect him, get away with that sort of remark. It seems to me that the Prime Minister was saying that in his view, and I think in the view of all my noble friends behind me, the policy which has been followed, the speeches which have been made by the Opposition on this matter of trade with Spain and frigates for Spain, have been totally irresponsible. And if this is the sort of policy that the Labour Government are going to follow, then the sooner we return a Conservative Government the better.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I want to point out that what the Prime Minister said in this particular speech was:
I have always known that the Socialists were too dangerous to allow them to form a Government.
§ LORD BOOTHBYMy Lords, before the noble Lord replies, may I just ask the noble Earl who leads the Opposition not to be too mealy-mouthed in this matter. For goodness' sake! let us have some good healthy, hearty controversy between the Parties. The noble Earl has greatly praised Sir Winston Churchill. I would remind him that Sir Winston Churchill described the Labour 715 Party as "a Gestapo", and that was worse than anything the present Prime Minister has said.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, are not some people getting very thinskinned? Is it really so much worse to say that the Socialist Party should not be given office than it was to say that the Tories were "lower than vermin"?