The Benn Diaries: 1940-1990 (52 page)

I don’t know if I really made any impression but it was an attempt.

Monday 3 December

Dinner with Wilfred Brown, who also believes we are heading for a slump and food riots and there must be a National Government. If this is what the businessmen are saying, it is significant.

At the Commons I saw John Biffen, who told me, ‘Enoch Powell is waiting for the call.’ Also at the House, Peter Shore told me that Michael Foot – who he thinks is marvellous – must be the next Leader of the Party.

Friday 7 December

Travelled to Bristol and my election agent, Ennis Harris, warned me I’d lose the Election because my left-wing views were not acceptable. In the evening I went to Knowle Ward for a meeting where there were only four people, despite having distributed 700 leaflets. It really was awful. There is a great sense of crisis everywhere.

Wednesday 12 December

We had a joint National Executive/Shadow Cabinet meeting to finalise our Election manifesto in the event of a snap decision by Heath. We started by discussing the crisis, which gets worse every day. Jim Callaghan said that our policy was intended for the natural end of a Parliament but the present crisis meant that we should expect emergency Tory measures and we might ourselves have to move quickly in response to the situation.

‘You can’t separate our policy from the crisis and therefore we should appeal to the British people with our analysis of the crisis. Pensioners mustn’t suffer,’ I said.

Then on the manifesto defence proposals, Frank Allaun wanted £1,000 million cuts and the closure of the Polaris bases. Jim felt that this would break up NATO and create pressure for a German nuclear force. Judith Hart then said defence spending by a Labour government couldn’t be sacrosanct. I argued that there was such a tough military-industrial complex in existence that we ought to be hard at this stage, or we never would be. Ted Short commented that the Tories would accuse us of leaving the country defenceless.

Finally, Jim suggested that Michael, Barbara, Tony Crosland, Terry Pitt and I draft the manifesto within a month.

Thursday 13 December

The trade figures came out with £270 million deficit. Went to the House of Commons and Heath announced a three-day working week to reduce energy consumption. There was a realisation of the great depth of the crisis.

Tuesday 18 December

IRA bombs in London.

First day of the economic and energy debate. Harold spoke and I wound up. Heath is beginning to crack. I felt somehow that there would be an Election and that this would be the last speech I would make for a very long time in Parliament. It was probably that silly old fortune teller in Derbyshire but somehow, the whole day I felt obsessed with the worry, which did nothing for my speech.

Sunday 23 December

I overslept and had a lazy day at home. Three more IRA bombs in London.

I tidied the office and wrapped Christmas gifts. We have decided not to go to Stansgate, because I felt I had to be ready for the possibility of an Election. The oil price was doubled again today, the second doubling since September.

Thursday 3 January 1974

I discovered that public meetings are not to be exempted from electricity restrictions, which will affect old-age pensioners’ clubs and community groups, whereas cinemas, strip clubs, bingo halls and commercial entertainment are allowed to continue. So I wrote to Peter Walker demanding that these restrictions be lifted, so that democracy could function.

Went in to Transport House after lunch. Ron Hayward has agreed to run the energy Monitoring Service and the statements will come from Transport House, with Donald Ross publishing his information bulletins.

At the Drafting Committee, I asked whether Michael Foot was right to compare our attitude to the situation with that in 1940 and 1945 because in 1940 Britain had a coalition government, to which Jim said, ‘Well,
I’m
in favour of a National Government.’

I repeated, ‘A National Government?’

‘Yes,’ he confirmed, ‘if it adopted our policy.’

‘What – a coalition government?’

‘Yes, but I know they wouldn’t,’ he said.

‘What you are saying is that you would be in favour of excluding from the public the choice between two policies.’

‘I think a coalition government, a National Government, would be a good thing if it would follow our policy,’ was his reply.

John Silkin had said to me before Christmas, that he thought Jim might be won over to a coalition government; and John’s theory was that Whitelaw – who had a great admiration for Jim – might offer him the premiership. I’d thought it a far-fetched idea, but this was a minor confirmation of it.

Monday 7 January

There was a cartoon in the
Daily Mail
depicting me as a stormtrooper with a swastika on my shoulder, ordering Joe Gormley and Ray Buckton to torture the British public, saying, ‘We have ways of making you suffer.’

Went in to the Organisation Sub-Committee at 3.30, which was held by candlelight and camping gas because Transport House does not have light on Mondays. On the question of the 20 January meeting on the Common Market, the Poplar Civic Theatre was not available because of the electricity cuts and the Government’s refusal to make an exception for political meetings, so the committee wanted to cancel the meeting.

‘You must be mad,’ I said. ‘We must go ahead with the meeting, we must bring pressure to bear on the Poplar Labour Party.’ John Cartwright, Director of the Royal Arsenal Co-operative Society, who was in the chair and who is the leader of the Labour Group on Greenwich Council, then said, ‘We can’t because the safety of the audience is at stake,’ and Tom Bradley added, ‘We might be breaking the law by having the meeting.’ ‘For God’s sake,’ I said, ‘if necessary we’ll have the meeting in the street and explain this is a ban on freedom of assembly. I have written to Peter Walker about it.’

Finally, it was agreed to issue a statement that we would go ahead with the meeting, but these chaps would capitulate on anything. If the Labour Party had been made illegal, they would have gone off to Wormwood Scrubs, mumbling under their breath ‘obey the law’ as they were bundled into the Black Marias. None of the top Labour leadership has any guts.

Wednesday 16 January

The main news today was a report of Enoch Powell’s attack on Heath, Powell maintaining that an Election would be a fraud. The Governor of the Bank of England said we would have ten years of austerity. The pound dropped to its lowest level ever, I think, to $2.16.

To the Shadow Cabinet and Harold opened by saying, ‘We won’t discuss whether there is going to be an Election or not; but let’s assume that the Cabinet is divided. Some Ministers are talking openly against Heath. If he fixes 7 February, it would be outrageously short, particularly with the printing difficulties and the three-day week. If it’s 14 February, it’s still an outrage because the electoral register used will be the old one within forty-eight hours of the new one becoming effective so we must make a maximum
attack on that. The Government fear the worst now. The Governor of the Bank of England’s statement was very important. I’ll do a speaking tour. we must all speak with
one
voice on the basis of the manifesto when we agree it. No private enterprise and no gimmicks. I will be in London every day of my press conference and I invite colleagues to join me from time to time. We must make no Party capital out of the OPEC oil crisis.’

Michael Foot said we mustn’t give the impression we could do nothing. ‘As Tony Benn said at the Conference, we should not make the crisis we inherit the excuse for not implementing our programme but the occasion for carrying it through. We must convince people we will do what we say.’

Jim Callaghan wasn’t convinced there would be an Election. He thought people would be nervous of voting if the street lights were out. What do we say to the miners? We must be simple and rather repetitive; don’t broaden it out too far. ‘Confrontation versus conciliation’ would be one theme and ‘Equality can’t await growth’ would be another. He hoped our party political broadcasts would be flexible.

Later, Harold said, ‘Ignore Enoch Powell because last time, the attack on him lost five seats.’

I interrupted and said, ‘Look Harold, I’ve heard you say this two or three times before and never contradicted you, but it just isn’t true.’

‘Well, I’ve said five times that you lost us five seats.’

‘Let me deny it once,’ I said, ‘and then you can proceed.’

That was more or less it. But I did say to Joe Haines outside, ‘I’m going to be the bogeyman.’

‘Oh yes, they’re expecting you to proclaim the revolution,’ Joe replied.

‘Well I’m tape-recording everything I say and every question and answer and every radio and television interview, so there will always be a complete transcript available: but I’m sure even that won’t prevent me being misrepresented.’

Monday 21 January

To lunch with the Iranian Ambassador in honour of Harold Wilson. The Ambassador is a bit of a playboy, has racehorses and so on. At the lunch were Harold, Jim, Ted Short, Eric Varley, Gerald Kaufman, Lord Greenhill, the Permanent Secretary at the Foreign Office, Sir Martin Charteris, the Queen’s Private Secretary, and others.

Sir Martin Charteris called me Tony, which I thought was friendly. I said, ‘Oh, you’re just the man I want to see to ask about dissolution and the rules governing it.’

He replied, ‘Well, the Queen has absolute rights.’

So I said, ‘Yes, of course, but I remember a discussion I had with the Queen’s former Private Secretary Michael Adeane at Hampton Court in 1966 where I got the impression that the Queen was not anxious to get too involved in controversial matters and was therefore quite pleased that the
Conservative Party, for example, had chosen a system of election for their leader to avoid the invidious task of her having to make a choice.’

‘Yes, that’s right. But as to a dissolution, she has absolute rights.’

So I said, ‘Let’s discuss it hypothetically because I realise that we can’t discuss the present position. But I take it the Queen would consult.’

‘Yes, she has an absolute right to consult.’

‘Well, I assume that she would consult former Prime Ministers. Does she consult the Speaker?’

‘No, I don’t think she does.’

‘Well, the Speaker is a Privy Councillor. He’s the man who knows about the House of Commons better than anyone else and from a completely detached position so, on questions of a dissolution, as to whether or not a man or a series of men might command a majority, the Speaker would be a very good person to advise.’

He said he had never thought of that and that it had never been done.

I said, ‘I know it hasn’t been done, but it would allow the Queen to distance herself slightly from the controversy by calling in the Speaker while preserving her absolute right.’

‘Oh yes,’ he replied. ‘We must preserve her right because I think there has to be some risk attached in order to provide excitement for the monarchy. And, of course, in the end, the Queen’s judgement would have to be tested by the events.’

He presumably meant that if the Queen refused dissolution to Heath, and then Heath was in some way defeated, this would be embarrassing to the Palace. So he said, ‘In 1926, Bing, who as Governor-General of Canada was the Crown’s representative, refused a dissolution to the then Prime Minister, Mackenzie King; King then resigned and got his government re-elected. The Governor-General’s relations with him were much strained afterwards.’

Obviously the Palace has been busy thinking about dissolutions and how to handle them, and maybe my suggestion about the Speaker will be noted. I was particularly interested when he said there must be some risk for the monarchy to make it exciting.

Afterwards, Jim Callaghan drove me back to the House and expressed his anxiety about the power of the trade unions.

‘Maybe, Jim, but look at the Government, run by the City of London, and nobody says the City is too powerful. It’s a question of whose side you are on. It’s a gut issue.’

‘They’re much too powerful,’ he replied.

‘Well, I don’t believe in powerful leaders. I believe in spreading the power among the rank and file. Anyway, you were always pro-union when they supported your view.’

‘Yes,’ he said, ‘but they are still much too powerful. This is our problem.’

Jim, in fairness to him, has always thought there wouldn’t be a snap Election.

Monday 28 January

I think Jim is edging himself into position for a coalition government. Prentice has apparently attacked McGahey again and McGahey is in a difficulty because, on the radio tonight, he said, ‘Many of the troops which may be mobilised are the sons of miners, and if they come to dig coal, we shall appeal to them and explain our case to them.’ A perfectly reasonable argument, nothing revolutionary in that. But people are now talking about sedition. I think we’re heading for trouble and I am tempted to make a speech in advance which warns that the full moral and criminal responsibility for what might happen will fall on the Prime Minister’s head.

Tuesday 29 January

On the 1 o’clock news was a report of a statement drafted by Hayward and Callaghan which began, ‘We speak for every member of the Labour Party as well as for millions outside it in sending the mineworkers our good wishes and support.’ Then it went on ‘. . . But Communists and other extremist leaders of the NUM say they have wider political objectives . . . We utterly repudiate any attempts by Communists or others to use the miners as a political battering ram . . .’ and so on.

Then came Wilson’s Early Day Motion that had been put on the Order Paper signed by himself, Ted Short, Douglas Houghton, Bob Mellish, Eric Varley and others attacking McGahey by name. Jim was interviewed on the news and he attacked McGahey’s reference to the troops. He said, ‘Who would take notice of the miners appealing to the troops? It’s rubbish’, and that there would be a long and bitter strike. This was obviously designed to dissuade the miners from voting for a strike. Petre Crowder, Tory MP for Ruislip-Northwood, was asked about his proposal for the establishment of vigilantes and he said he hoped he would have the chance of driving a lorry through a picket line. Then Jill Knight, Conservative MP for Edgbaston, said strikers were the enemy of the state.