LORD STONHAM'S SPEECH AND GOVERNMENT POLICY (Hansard, 13 July 1965)

§ LORD CONESFORD
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I am very glad that this Question has been asked about the speech of my noble and greatly esteemed friend Lord Stonham. My noble friend outlined the steps which have been, and are being, taken to solve the economic problems we inherited; the support which "sound, efficient businesses" have given to these proposals; and condemned the actions of a few people which, in his view, are inimical to the country's interests.

§ LORD CONESFORD
My Lords, may I thank the noble Earl for that Answer and ask him supplementary questions on two points in the speech? The first is: Is he aware that the noble Lord spoke of "saboteurs in the City" delaying the receipt of foreign currency due to them? Is the noble Earl also aware that, if they had done that in fact, the Treasury could have taken action against them under the Exchange Control Act, 1947? Did the Treasury in fact take any such action? Perhaps the noble Lord would like to answer that before I put the next supplementary.

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I rather side with the noble Viscount, Lord Stuart of Findhorn, who implied that certain questions usually continue after the House wants to move on. So far as this one is concerned, may 102 I make it plain that my noble friend was clearly referring not to the City as a whole but to a minority who put their political views before the national interest. It will be within the recollection of the House that I spoke on this whole subject at some length in our recent economic debate, and my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer also spoke about this. Neither my noble friend nor any of us have said that the City as a whole had not been patriotic.

§ LORD CONESFORD
My Lords, that was not the question I asked. I asked whether the Treasury had taken any action, as they could have done. But I can put that question down for another day. May I ask a second supplementary? Is the noble Earl aware that the noble Lord is reported as saying: Tories do not shrink from any tactic, however squalid, if it will weaken the pound"? Did the noble Lord in fact say that, and is that the view of Her Majesty's Government?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I am ready to believe that the noble Lord used some vivid phrases in the course of his speech; but if you take the speech as a whole—and I do not suppose any member of the House, with one or two exceptions, can have read the speech as a whole—and do not pick out unrepresentative phrases, it fairly represents the view of the Government.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
My Lords, may I ask whether the noble Lord will withdraw that particular phrase now?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I have a profound respect for the noble Marquess, but he cannot dictate to me to withdraw anything now or at any time.

§ LORD CARRINGTON
My Lords, while making every allowance for the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, was speaking at a Party political meeting, and the fact that he is a well-respected and well-liked Member of the House, I would ask: would not the noble Lord agree that, in the present serious economic situation, it is essential that there should be co-operation and trust between the Government and the 103 City, and that speeches of this kind from a Minister really do not help?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, the last point is a matter of opinion. I venture to wonder whether the noble Lord read the speech as a whole. In my opinion, one should read the speech as a whole before passing comment on the speech as a whole. If the views of the Government about cooperation are required, they can be obtained by consulting our last debate or the many statements of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has testified more than once to the excellent co-operation received on the whole from business and commerce.

LORD SALTOUN
My Lords, I am afraid I do not understand the answer. If you make a long speech on matters of public interest, and in the course of it you call a man a swindler, does it take away from the epithet that you have put on to this man to talk about the general effect of the speech? I do not really understand his dis-culpation. Perhaps the noble Lord would explain.

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, the noble Lord did not call any individual human being a swindler. He used rather strong language, such as is often used by noble Lords opposite, and by noble Lords in all parts of the House, in weekend speeches—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS
No.

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
—and I am surprised that noble Lords should be so sensitive about it.

§ LORD MOLSON
My Lords, would the noble Earl the Leader of the House say whether his noble friend is prepared to make available the authentic text of the speech, so that it can be studied by noble Lords who wish to do so?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords. I have here the Press release, which I shall be pleased to hand to the noble Lord forthwith.

§ LORD BLYTON
My Lords, does my noble friend not recognise that the Conservative Party, both here and in another place, are very thin-skinned? Does he appreciate that my noble friend Lord Stonham's words this weekend are not incomparable with what Sir Winston 104 Churchill said about the Conservative Party? He said: The Conservative Party is not a party but a conspiracy … the great vested interests handed together in a formidable federation; corruption at home, aggression to cover it up abroad, the trickery of tariff juggles, the tyranny of a party machine, sentiment by the bucketful, patriotism by the imperial pint, the open hand at the public Exchequer"—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS
Speech, speech!

§ LORD BLYTON
— the open door at the public house, dear food for the million, cheap labour for the millionaire … the Conservative Party is nothing less than a deliberate attempt on the part of important sections of the propertied classes to transfer their burdens to the shoulders of the masses of the people and to claim greater profits for the investment of their capital by charging higher prices. My noble friend's words are no worse than the words of Sir Winston Churchill, whom we all revered.

§ LORD BYERS
My Lords, I should like to mention—I do not see why the noble Lord, Lord Blyton, should get away with this—that when Sir Winston Churchill said that he was a Liberal.

§ LORD CONESFORD
My Lords, in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Blyton, is the noble Earl aware that I am certainly not in the least thin-skinned and I greatly welcome this speech? All I desire to discover is whether it represented the views of Her Majesty's Government.

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, the answer is that if you take the speech as a whole, and understand the general argument—well, you have the answer.

§ VISCOUNT DILHORNE
My Lords, am I to understand that taking the speech as a whole means taking all the individual parts of it, and therefore that particular part was expressing the Government's view?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I lack the legal training of the noble and learned Viscount, and I am not sorry on this occasion that I lack it.

§ LORD CHESHAM
My Lords, may I ask the noble Earl whether he is asking us to believe that if we take the speech as a whole (as he likes to call it) the 105 words to which my noble friend Lord Conesford has called our attention will change their meaning?

§ THE EARL OF LONGFORD
My Lords, I think they can be seen in better perspective.