A Prime Minister on Prime mInisters ..... Harold Wilson and his reflections on those who preceded him ......

 One of my treasured possessions is a signed copy of Harold Wilson's book a Prime Minister on Prime Ministers.

In the book Wilson reviews the leadership of twelve Prime Ministers from The Younger Pitt to Harold McMillan, all fare well in his generous review.

Of course Lord Wilson is not here now to review the current Prime Minister, although he does quote from a satirical review of the shortest Prime Ministerial administration, that of the Earl of Bath, which lasted 48 and 3/4 hours, 7 minutes and 11 seconds, and:

'which may truly be called the most honest of all administrations: the minister to the astonishment of all wise men never transacted one rash thing; and, what is more marvellous, left as much money in the Treasury as he found in it'.

I leave you the reader to make your own judgement as to what Lord Wilson might have made of the Johnson administration!

It is my opinion that Wilson was the best of all the Prime Ministers who have served in that office in my lifetime, his legacy is The Open University compared with Edward Heath, the the three day week and Margaret Thatcher's Poll Tax.

The title Prime Minister was first used in 1878 by Disraeli, who Wilson forms us:

'signed the final instrument of the Congress of Berlin as 'First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister of Her Brittanic Majesty'.

Now we have Boris Johnson whose legacy will be Brexit, who as Katy Balls the Spectator’s deputy political editor writes in The Guardian today is:

'A weakened Prime Minister facing a party divided on Brexit and a European Union that is inclined to wait and negotiate with their eventual successor'.

It was Lord Wilson who coined the phrase 'a week is a long time in politics' but tragically for the country, for our relationship with Europe, for the Northern Ireland Peace Process, for the poorest in our society, for the increasing number of children in poverty, for those relying on food banks, for those who cannot afford to heat their homes, this administration has lasted longer than a week, far longer, far too long.

Towards the end of his reflections on the Prime Ministership of Harold McMillan, discussing his successor in that office, Lord Home Lord Wilson quotes from an article written bu William Rees Mogg, whose son of course serves in the present administration, Rees Mogg wrote that the conservatives had 

'ceased to be gentlemen without becoming democrats'.

A comment that might well be applied to a number of those who now make up Boris Johnson's cabinet which is of course thought by many to be a calculated measure to ensure that there is no 'prince elect' waiting in the wings or sitting around the cabinet table.

Of course Clement Attlee, under whom Harold Wilson served, is considered by Wilson in a positive light:

'No peacetime Prime Minister this century has achieved more in his years in office'.

In fact whilst in public,Attlee was modest and unassuming, behind the scenes his depth of knowledge, quiet demeanour, objectivity and pragmatism proved decisive. 

He is often ranked as one of the greatest British prime ministers. Attlee's reputation among scholars has grown, thanks to his creation of the modern welfare state, and the establishment of the NHS. 

So here we are. We are where we are. To reflect on Prime Ministers as Harold Wilson did in his book is sufficient because of course the present incumbent of that office simply doesn't measure up to those about whom Wilson wrote.

There is no need to especially criticise the present regime because it fails by comparison, its ineptitude, its rewriting of the moral code, its failure to feel sympathy as Attlee, as Wilson reflects, did:

'Clem and his brother began to ask each other what was wrong with an economic system that produced such depressed conditions - sweated incomes, unemployment, appalling housing conditions, infant and maternal mortality, only the barest provision for health treatment or for education'.

The Attlee's joined Keir Hardie's Independent Labour Party.

But as I look in my rear view mirror it seems to me that their reflection, the questions they asked about the capitalist economic system and the way that they answered their questions does make me ask why those questions remain unasked and unanswered by the present Conservative party and the cabinet? 

And before you respond, can I say that that is a rhetorical question!