"The Simple Truth"

"Mr. Thorneycroft," gruffed the deeply Scottish accent of the Speaker, and silence descended on the House of Commons. From the third bench below the gangway on the government side, traditionally the place taken by a retiring minister, rose the tall man whose resignation as Chancellor of the Exchequer 2 1/2 weeks before had precipitated the debate. Without rhetoric, flourish or grandiose phrase, Peter Thorneycroft explained the realities behind his refusal to increase government spending this year by "less than 1%." In doing so, he cut through years of polemics and political obfuscations to state the wider reality of Britain's new position in the world.

"For twelve years," he said, "we have been attempting to do more than our resources could manage, and in the process we have been gravely weakening ourselves. We have, in a sense, been trying to do two things at the same time. First, we have sought to be a nuclear power, matching missile with missile and anti-missile with antimissile, and with large conventional forces in the Far East, the Middle

East and the Atlantic. At the same time we have sought to maintain a Welfare State."

"We have been trying to do those things against the background of having to repay debt abroad during the next eight years of a total equal to the whole of our existing reserves ... of seeking to conduct a great international banking business, of sustaining our position as one of the world's major overseas investors. Over twelve years we have slithered from one crisis to another. It has meant a pound sterling which has sunk from 20 shillings to twelve. It is a picture of a nation in full retreat from its responsibilities. That is not the path to greatness. It is the road to ruin."

The House listened with hushed respect. "I am not here to criticize my colleagues or indeed my political opponents," he went on. As between the bank rate that he had raised to the highest level (7%) in 37 years and the physical controls that Opposition Leader Hugh Gaitskell advocates to check inflation, he confessed: "Neither of these works very well." Taxation, he said, "has already reached a point where I should think most men would admit it is inflationary in its effect."

Nothing Else. "The simple truth," concluded Thorneycroft, "is that we have been spending more money than we should. Our basic problem, whether it is in the Welfare State or whether it is in arms, is that we should plan to spend less than we are planning to spend at the present time. Nothing else will serve. I believe there is an England which would prefer to face these facts and make the necessary decisions now."

Filing past out of the chamber, member after member paused to whisper to Thorneycroft, rest a hand on his shoulder or otherwise show their support. Thorneycroft had obviously abandoned neither his hopes of winning his anti-inflationary fight nor his ambitions as a prospective Tory Prime Minister. Last week he advanced both those hopes appreciably. The government carried off the debate by a 62-vote majority, and Peter Thorneycroft voted with his party. But in resigning, Thorneycroft had come close to winning the fight he had lost in the Cabinet. For many of his fellow Tories had voted to be loyal to the government on the terms so starkly stated by ex-Chancellor Thorneycroft.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.