Chapter 164 Volume 5, Chapter 9 is busy with domestic affairs

Reporting the war situation to parliament, accusations of slow action, talk of calling for a second front, and evaluation of the Italian government's actions, the same principle applies to Germany's targets to be destroyed, Nazi tyranny and Prussian militarism, and concerns about the possibility of drones Warning of coming bombing Need to unite the people of Italy Sir Kingsley Wood, Chancellor of the Exchequer, dies Sir John Anderson succeeds Admiral Pound, Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1373 and the Azores coal mining industry Reconstruction of the present House of Commons Two features necessary for an effective House of Commons Concerning the transition from war to peace My memorandum on plans for the transition period Appointing Lord Woolton as Secretary of State for Building.

On my way home, I drafted a speech to be delivered in Parliament upon my return.I am well aware of the criticism I must be subject to, and I also know that successive victories in war only make disaffected people in the House of Commons and in the press feel more free to express their opinions. So, on September 21st, two days after landing, I made a report in the House of Commons, which took up no less than two and a half hours.I asked for an hour's adjournment, and the council granted it, in order to avoid the MPs wandering out to lunch in bits and pieces. The first accusation was that much time was wasted in launching the offensive against Naples because of fruitless negotiations with the Italian government.For this, I know I have a good answer.

I know that it has been said that forty days of precious time were wasted in these negotiations, and that the blood of the British and American armies was needlessly spilled on the land near Salerno.This kind of criticism is actually groundless, and on the other hand, it hurt the feelings of the families of the victims.We took no account of the attitude of the Italian Government when we fixed the time for the main offensive against Italy, and the provisional date for this campaign had actually been established long before negotiations with them, even before the fall of Mussolini. Decided.This date was shifted by the time it would take us to withdraw our landing craft from the beaches on the south coast of Sicily.And up to the first week of August, the bulk of our troops actually engaged there had to be supplied daily by the beaches of the south coast of Sicily.After these landing craft were withdrawn, they had to return to Africa.Some of the damaged landing craft, which are quite a number, still need to be repaired and then re-equipped with all their munitions, etc., according to extremely strict and complicated procedures. Only in this way can we talk about conducting another amphibious operation.

I think people have realized that these issues have to be very well thought out. Each landing craft or ship of war is loaded, as far as possible, in strict order, according to estimates which may be made in advance, so that the troops on board will receive supplies already on land when they land.Each truckload of supplies arrives with exactly what each unit needs.Some trucks waded to the boat and then waded back.They are all shipped in strict order, with the most needed supplies on top, so that random loading is avoided as much as possible.And only by adopting the above-mentioned methods can this special military operation be carried out in the face of powerful modern artillery fire possessed by a small number of enemies.The specifics of the landing craft and their preparation are the only, but decisive, limiting factor.It has nothing to do with the talk of wasting time negotiating, and with the claim that the Foreign Office is blocking the actions of the generals because of fear of this clause or that clause, etc.In the execution of military combat operations, there is never a moment's pause, and everything else must be adapted to the main military transport.

I am amazed when I hear people speak lightly of sending modern troops here and there ashore, as if they were bundles tossed on the beach and left alone: ​​the conditions of modern warfare Still so ignorant. If I may digress for a moment, I will say that when I arrived on Sunday morning, reading this criticism in the papers, I was reminded of the simple story of a sailor who once jumped into a dock (in Plymouth, I think) ), rescued a drowning child.About a week later, a woman greeted the sailor, and asked him, were you the one who rescued my child from the dock that night?The sailor replied modestly, I am, madam.The woman said: Ah, I was looking for you.Where is my child's hat?

The second accusation concerns the Second Front, which Communists and others have been pressing for. Now I want to express my opinion to the German High Command and the House of Commons. I want to both confuse the former and educate the latter. I call the front which we opened first in Africa, then in Sicily, and now in Italy, the third front.The potential second battlefield, which is rapidly gathering strength, has not yet begun, but it is waiting here.Nobody can say, and I certainly won't hint when it will open, but there is a Second Front, and it has become the main concern of the enemy.It hasn't been developed yet, or it hasn't played a role yet, but the moment will come.When the time comes, this field will be opened, and the great offensive from the west will begin, which will be matched by an attack from the south.

If one does not know the details and numbers of the American troops concentrated in England, or of our own mighty expeditionary force which is preparing here, the dispositions of the enemy's forces in the various fields, and the estimation of the enemy's reserves and resources, and If the enemy's ability to move large numbers of troops from one theater to another through the great railroad system in Europe does not know the size and condition of our fleet and landing craft of all types, then it is indeed impossible for them to react to such an operation Post helpful comments. (At this point one of our two Communist MPs interjected: Does this apply to Marshal Stalin?) We should not listen to the British Communists on such matters, because we know they have been doing nothing.When we are in the moment of life and death, they don't care about our fate.Whatever opinions we hear will come from our friends and allies who join us in the common cause of victory.The House of Commons may be absolutely confident that the present Government of His Majesty the King will never be moved, or suppressed, in matters of this class by any ignorant agitation or pressure, however well-reasoned that agitation may be done, or imposed. How well-intentioned this pressure is.Nor will we be pressured and coaxed against our own better judgment into launching large-scale operations in order to achieve political consensus or applause from any quarter.The cruelest part of the war for Great Britain and the United States must be recognized as yet to come.The House of Commons and the Government will not flinch from this severe test.For the common cause, we will not hesitate to sacrifice anything.

The most difficult issue was the decision President Roosevelt and I made about Italy.As the reader will see in the preceding chapters, I have urged the adoption of this decision, which consisted in intervening with the King of Italy and Marshal Badoglio to recognize them as common belligerents against Germany, and to treat them as such. .This time, as in the case of Admiral Darlan a year earlier, it was that class that got excited again.But on this issue, I have a more sufficient reason. We can measure and identify what the Italian government has done. It is indeed recognized and praised by the Italian people.Mr. Hitler assures us that he considers the conduct of Italy to be extremely disloyal and despicable, and he is a good judge on such matters.Others might think that when the Fascists, led by Mussolini, used their tyrannical power for material gain to attack a crumbling France, and thus became an enemy of the British Empire, which for many years had cherished the cause of Italian liberty, it had already Constitutes an act of perfidy and ingratitude.This is indeed a crime.In spite of the irreparable nature of this crime, and in spite of the fact that those peoples who allow tyrants to violate their rights and liberties must be severely punished for the crimes committed by those tyrants, I cannot help but think that Italy's actions at this critical moment were justified. Natural and human, let this be the first act in a series of self-expiatory acts.

The Italian people have suffered greatly.Their sons were lost in Africa and Russia, their soldiers were abandoned in battle, their wealth wasted, their empire was lost irretrievably.Now, their own beautiful homeland is bound to become a battlefield for the German rearguard.More serious disasters are still ahead of them.They would also be plundered and reigned in terror under Hitler's rage and vengeance, but the Italian people would be rescued from their slavery and humiliation thanks to the advance of British Imperial and American troops in Italy. After a certain period of time, they will resume their rightful place among the free democracies of the modern world.

When I speak of this situation in Italy, I am very rightly asked, will your arguments apply to the German people as well?I said: the situation is different.Twice in our lifetime the Germans, and three times in our fathers' generation, threw the world into their wars of expansion and aggression.They combine the qualities of soldiers and slaves in a most vicious way.They do not value liberty themselves, but hate it when they see it in others.Once they are strong, they seek the victim; they follow with iron discipline the figure who leads them in their quest.At the heart of Germany is Prussia.It is the source of repeated plagues, but we are not at war with such a people.It is against tyranny that we fight, to preserve ourselves from destruction.I am convinced that the peoples of England, America, and Russia have twice suffered incalculable consumption, danger, and loss of life in the pursuit of the Teuton nation for hegemony during a quarter of a century; Prussia or all of Germany could no longer attack them with long-settled vengeance and long-planned schemes.Nazi tyranny and Prussian militarism are two factors in German life that we must completely destroy.Both of these factors must be eradicated if Europe and the world are to be saved from an even more dire third war.

Burke [1] once said, I do not know how to draw up a complaint against a people, and the disputes about the truth of his statement seem to me tedious and pedantic.Now we need to fire on two obvious and specific targets, Nazi tyranny and Prussian militarism.Let's put every gun on them and mobilize everyone who will fight to attack them.We should not unnecessarily increase our onerous tasks, or burden our soldiers.For those satellite countries that are threatened and lured, if they can help shorten the war, they may be able to make their merits worthless.But the twin roots of all our ills, Nazi tyranny and Prussian militarism, must be fought.Unless we achieve this end, we will not hesitate to make any sacrifices; we will go through fire and water if necessary.I will say one more thing: I am now in my old age, and able to have some influence on the affairs of state, so I would like to say that I will not prolong this war for a day if it is not necessary; And as we share in the great responsibility of planning the future of the world, we will adopt that composure and composure that we have manifested in the moments of our lives and our lives. [1] Edmund Burke (1729 | 1797), a British political commentator.translator I have considered that in my speech this time there should be a serious and definite warning that unmanned aircraft or rockets are about to strike us.It is always prudent to warn of things long before they happen, and to document this in public documents.This is especially true when the scale and seriousness of such attacks are difficult to estimate. Under no circumstances should we allow these favorable trends to weaken our efforts or lead us to assume that the danger is over or that the war is coming to an end.We must, on the contrary, expect that the vicious enemy whom we are now striking will make every frenzied effort to exact revenge.German leaders, starting with Hitler, have spoken with cryptic hints that they will soon be trying new methods and new weapons against us.It is certainly not surprising that such rumors are spread by the enemy in order to encourage their people, but their implications may not be limited to this.For example, we've now encountered a new type of aerial bomb that the enemy has now begun using to attack our ships traveling close to the coast.It's arguably a rocket-propelled glide bomb that's launched from a fairly high altitude and then apparently directed by the parent aircraft to its target.The Germans are now probably developing other new weapons with which they hope to harm us and, in a way, make up for the losses they take from us every day.I can only assure the House that these possibilities have been constantly vigilant and studied vigorously, as far as we can. I have also briefly expressed my views on the political situation in Italy, and on the harsh reality of the civil war that is raging in that unfortunate country. After Mussolini was rescued by paratroopers, he fled to Germany, trying to organize a Quisling-style government, and wanted to rely on German force to put the fascist yoke around the necks of the Italian people again, which of course caused the Italian civil war .In the general interest and in the interest of Italy, all remaining forces in Italian national life must be united around their legitimate government, and at the same time all liberal and left-wing elements must be supported by the King of Italy and Marshal Badoglio, As long as these liberals and leftists resist the alliance of fascists and traitors, and thus create the conditions that will help drive this diabolical alliance from Italian territory, or better yet destroy it on the spot.We are now beginning to save and liberate Italy. (One MP interjected: You cannot make the Italian people rise up under the banner of those traitors.) I think that this honorable MP may not have given enough thought to the importance of alleviating the difficult task that our soldiers have to undertake .The government was indeed prepared to adopt such a policy as to bring about all possible forces to resist the Germans and drive them out of Italy.We will not be inactive for fear that there may not be full agreement on this issue.The British Parliament is not based on unanimity; parliaments in democracies do not act on unanimity.They act by majority vote.That's the way they do things. I wish to make it very clear that we are now trying to unite the strongest forces in Italy against a combination of Germans and Mussolini/Quisling/Fascists. My last paragraph is not very polite, but honest: The best way to gain flexibility is to prepare three or four plans for all contingencies that may arise, and to work out all the details in detail.Then it's much easier to go from one plan to another at your own pace. These arguments persuaded the House of Commons, so that no vigorous charge was raised. The sudden death of the Chancellor on the same day as I delivered this lengthy speech was a grave and unexpected loss for me and my colleagues.I heard the news when I woke up early on the morning of the 22nd.In recent years, Kingsley Wood has become one of my closest personal friends.After he entered the Air Ministry in 1938, we worked for the same goal.I give him my full support; and he undoubtedly made an invaluable contribution to the preparation of the RAF for the colossal disaster of 1940.He has been Chancellor of the Exchequer with distinction since I was called upon to form a coalition government.His third national budget, amounting to £5.75 billion, was balanced, in keeping with all the soundest principles of wartime finance.Half of the income comes from taxes.Our loan interest rates are very low.Instead of using the slogan of six per cent interest on mortgages during the First World War, we managed to borrow enormous sums at an average rate of two per cent during the fifth year of the war.The cost of living has not risen by more than thirty per cent compared to pre-war levels.The principle of living within one's means was something that Kingsley Wood considered day and night in the weeks before his death.On the day of his death, he also hoped to address the issue in the House of Commons.When I asked him in 1940 to compensate those whose homes and businesses had been destroyed during the Blitz, he fulfilled my request with the utmost efficiency on the basis of an elaborate insurance scheme he had conceived.On that day, before the House of Commons sat, I spent several hours composing his memory, which is entered in the record. I felt that Sir John Anderson, then Privy President, Chairman of the most important Cabinet Committee and our country's chief representative in the work of alloy pipes, was a very suitable successor.John Anderson was Internal Revenue Secretary and Home Secretary for ten years.But his broad vision cannot be obtained from any one department.In the tumults of Ireland he kept his composure, though he continually risked his life; when he was governor of Bengal, there were attempts at murder against him, but he remained as calm as ever.His insights were keen and powerful, his will unwavering, and he had long experience in a wide variety of positions.His appointment was announced on September 24. [1] Research and development of the atomic bomb. I saw very little of Sir Dudley Pond on our return voyage, except for a few conversations on deck, for he was often confined to his stateroom.On his way to London by train, he sent me a letter formally resigning as First Sea Lord; a burdensome post which I had relieved him when his illness worsened in Washington.The question of his successor requires careful consideration. Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham, recommended by the Lord of the Admiralty, Sir Alexander, was an obvious choice because of the reputation he had gained in various campaigns in the Mediterranean.On the other hand, at a time when so many things are moving forward and the campaigns are expanding, will he be able to leave the scene?Admiral Fraser, then Commander-in-Chief of the Home Fleet, was an admiral with high prestige at sea, and had long experience in the administrative affairs and staff work of the Admiralty.I first asked him to take up this role.Admiral Fraser said there was no doubt he would serve wherever he was sent, but he believed Andrew Cunningham was the most suitable candidate.I believe I have the confidence of my own fleet, he said: Cunningham has the confidence of the whole Navy.He asked me to think more about the matter.I replied that his attitude was very correct, so after further consideration and negotiation, I followed his advice and decided to face up to the serious issue of changing the commander of the Mediterranean operation.So Admiral Andrew Cunningham was chosen.He was succeeded by his second-in-command, Admiral John Cunningham.On October 4th, when I published the following letter to Sir Dudley Pound, I announced this change of personnel to the public and naval circles who had hitherto been unaware of Pound's illness.The letter reads as follows: I do regret that our four years of service in this war should come to an end when you felt compelled to resign for health reasons.No one but I know the value of your service to the security of our nation and to the success of our military during your tenure in the Department of the Navy and the Chiefs of Staff.Your great knowledge and virtuosity in all aspects of naval warfare, your fortitude in times of trouble and calamity, your resourcefulness and detachment in the risks you must undertake to achieve victory, all these qualities combine to make you A memorable First Sea Lord in the history of the Royal Navy. You leave us at a time when the dominion of the Mediterranean is practically in our hands, when the Italian fleet has surrendered to us in the harbor of the island of Malta, and what is more important, when the submarine threat has been weakened to the point of this war to an unprecedented extent.These achievements are of inestimable value to your country, and your outstanding contribution has added glory to your name. Pound lived only two weeks.He was completely paralyzed by the onset of another, more severe stroke.The last time I saw him, although he was sane as usual, he couldn't speak, and he couldn't move most of his limbs.When I shook his left hand and said good-bye to him, he squeezed my hand with a force that is quite surprising.He has been a loyal comrade in arms of mine both in the Admiralty and on the Chiefs of Staff Committee.He died on the 21st of October, Trafalgar Day. [1] Admiral Fraser returned to his fleet at Scapa Flow.At the end of the year, he sailed to sea with his flagship, and in a frontal encounter, he sank the German battlecruiser Scharnhorst, thus establishing his exploits. It was an extremely honorable and significant naval episode.When I met him afterwards in London, I made him recall the following famous line: [1] Cape Trafalgar is located at the southwestern tip of Spain, near the Strait of Gibraltar.On October 21, 1805, the British fleet defeated the French fleet in the waters near the Cape.translator In our turbulent island story, Not just once or twice, loyal people, Finally got the honor. The admiral seemed all the more pleased because, so far as I could judge, he had never heard these lines before.I hope he'll think I improvised on purpose. I have not written here in detail of the lengthy correspondence which I have exchanged with the United States or Portugal by which we have concluded an agreement concerning the use of the Azores of vital importance by the British and American small fleets and air forces.All matters were satisfactorily resolved, and I was therefore able to report our final results to Parliament on October 12th.I said: I want to declare to the House of Commons a matter which arose out of a treaty between my country and Portugal signed in 1373 by His Majesty Edward III of England and Ferdinand and Eleanor, King and Queen of Portugal.I spoke in a steady tone, and paused a little so that the MPs could catch the date 1373.When everyone seriously considered this date, there seemed to be a sound of surprise in the venue.I think that in the day-to-day business of British diplomacy, there has been no detail in the past, and there will be no detail in the future that there is such an ongoing relationship between the two countries. This treaty, I go on, was extended by 1386, 1643, 1654, 1660, 1661, 1703, and 1815. It was supplemented by the various forms of treaties of 1899 and the secret declaration of 1899.In a more modern period, the validity of these ancient treaties was recognized by two arbitration treaties concluded with Portugal in 1904 and 1914.The first paragraph of the Treaty of 1373 reads as follows: First we decide and make a covenant, from now on, there will be True, loyal, unchanging, mutual, enduring, and sincere affections of friendship, association, alliance, and concrete action, and, as true and faithful friends, we shall henceforth treat each other as friends of each other To be friends and to make each other's enemies into enemies, to help, sustain and support each other with navies and armies against all enemies, living or dead. This treaty has continued to the present for almost six hundred years, which is unparalleled in the history of the world.Now I want to announce its application in recent times.At the beginning of this war, the Portuguese Government, with the full consent of His Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom, adopted a policy of neutrality in order to prevent the war from spreading to the Iberian Peninsula.The Portuguese government has repeatedly stated that the above-mentioned policy is in no way in conflict with the Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of Alliance, the most recent in Dr. Salazar's speech on April 27, and the Portuguese government has reaffirmed the Treaty of Alliance at the beginning of the war. His Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom, by virtue of this ancient treaty of alliance, has now requested the Government of Portugal to grant it certain facilities in the Azores, so that we may afford better protection to our merchant ships in the Atlantic.The Government of Portugal has agreed to our request, and the Governments of the two countries have agreed with immediate effect: (1) the conditions for the use of the above-mentioned equipment by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, (2) the British relationship with the Portuguese armed forces and the Portuguese national economy , to help provide necessary supplies and supplies.The agreement concerning the use of Shefen in the Azores was only temporary and did not in any way prejudice the sovereignty maintained by the Portuguese Government over Portuguese territories. The next day I had to address the House at length on the situation in the coal mines, which had been affected by the urgent need for coal, the manpower requirements of the fighting forces, and the potential threat of the nationalization of the coal mines unresolved among the parties. affected.There have been many disputes over the nationalization of coal mines, and all I am concerned with is keeping the country united. I think it might be useful if, at the outset of this discussion, I draw the attention of the House of Commons to the general fundamentals on which we are now based.We now have a national coalition government which is united in its efforts to lift the country out of the distress which has been caused by the actions, or inactions, of the various parties over a long period of time.I am in a comparative advantage on this matter, because I have been out of it for eleven years.The ongoing war brings us together.We will never ask any Socialist or Liberal or Labor to renounce his beliefs.Because that kind of request is impolite and inappropriate.The external thing unites us, it concentrates all our attention.The principle we pursue is that everything is for war, whether it is disputed or not; there is no need to argue about anything that is not really necessary for war. This is our attitude.Let us also be careful not to allow people to use the necessities of war as an excuse for effecting far-reaching social or political reforms by indirect means.Take, for example, the question of the nationalization of coal mines. These words never frighten me. After the last war I advocated the nationalization of the railways, but I must say that I have been somewhat influenced by the experience of state management of railways after the war.Under that system of management, the public was not well served, the stockholders were not satisfied with profits, and one of the worst and most dangerous strikes was brought about which has ever caught my attention. Yet, as I have pointed out, all will accept the principle of nationalization, provided adequate compensation is given.The question at issue was not moral right or wrong, but whether nationalization would indeed create a more profitable cause for the country as a whole than relying on private enterprise and competition.The nationalization of the coal mines will attract many different opinions, and is a very large business, and unless it can be shown that this is the only way we can win the war, to the satisfaction of the House of Commons and the nation of convinced and responsible ministers, we will not go through it once General election, there is no legitimate reason to implement the nationalization method.It is very difficult to hold a general election at present. I have heard, and can well understand, that there was an apprehension among the miners as to what would happen to them personally and to their enterprises after the war. After the last war they had a horrific experience which continued to torment them for a long time and which greatly affected their whole conception of mining as a means of earning a living.I know that this worry exists.Each of us can lay awake in bed and imagine the terrible nightmare that we will encounter after the war is over, and each of us will have his own difficulties and worries at that time.But, in my case, since I'm an optimist, I don't think peace will be as bad as war, and I hope we won't make it that bad either.After the last war I was in a position of responsibility throughout the last war when almost everyone misbehaved as much as possible and the country was at times almost out of control.Since this war, we have benefited a lot from the experience of the last war.Because of past experience, our combat results are much better than in the past.We also need to learn the hard lessons of what happened last time in peacetime.Armed with experience acquired at great cost by the government of the time, we shall make the transition from war to peace more orderly and disciplined than we did last time. When I say this, I am not condemning the government of the time. But the miners are worried about their future.His Majesty's Government assured them that the present system of management, together with any possible reforms, would continue after the war until Parliament had decided on the future structure of the enterprise.This means that either the major political parties negotiate a solution, or hold general elections, and let the people freely choose political theories and political leaders.But, in any event, until all this has been accomplished, there will be no decisive change in the present system of coal mining enterprises, nor will any of the guarantees of continued employment, wages, and profit limits contained therein be removed.I am very eager for all of us to work together on this. This statement eased the tension that existed at the time, and it is with great pleasure that I revisit this speech today. Finally, on October 28th, the question of rebuilding the House of Commons was to be considered. It so happened that a bomb blew up the House of Commons, in which I had spent the greater part of my life, to rubble.I am determined to rebuild it as soon as our struggle will allow.At present I have the authority to make permanent plans for things.With the support of the overwhelming majority of my colleagues who were born in Parliament, and with the sincere assistance of Mr. Attlee, I propose to redefine the two principles upon which the architectural form of the English House of Commons should for a considerable period of time be governed.The first principle is that it must be rectangular, not semicircular; the second principle is that the building can only accommodate about two-thirds of the seats.This assertion has long astonished foreigners, so I shall describe it here. There are two main features of the House of Commons architecture that will win the approval and support of thoughtful and experienced MPs.The first is that its shape should be rectangular, not semicircular.This is a powerful factor in our political life.The semicircular parliamentary venue is very attractive to political theorists.It enables each person or group to move around the center, adopting varying degrees of attitude as the political climate changes.I am a heartfelt supporter of the party system and not of the bloc system.I have seen many serious and lively parliaments ruined by the bloc system.The rectangular venue of the parliament is very beneficial to the party system. It is easy for one to move from left to right through the imperceptible grades, but to move from one seat to the opposite is an act requiring serious consideration.I'm an insider on this issue because I've been through that difficult process not once but twice.Reasoning is a poor instruction compared with habit.Starting from reasoning, many countries have built semicircular parliamentary venues. Each member not only has a seat to sit on, but also often has a table for writing and a tabletop for tapping. According to our comparison in the hometown and birthplace of the parliament From the perspective of parliamentary understanding, this reasoning is a fatal wound of parliamentary politics. 按照下院的形狀所建成的議會會場的第二個特點是：它不應當大得足以同時容納它的所有議員而不感覺擁擠；而且也不應當為每個議員保留一個單獨的席位。造成這個特點的原因，對於不懂內情的局外人，很久以來一直是一個謎，而且也常常激起新議員的好奇心，甚至他們的批評。但是，如果你從實際觀點來觀察的話，這也不難理解。如果下院大得足以容納它的所有議員，那麼在進行辯論時，十次就有九次，會使人感到彷彿是在一個幾乎完全空曠或半空曠的議場那種蕭條冷落的氣氛中進行的。在下院，一篇好的演說的要素在於談話式的風格，在於可以讓人活潑地和非正式地插話和交談。在講壇上發表長篇大論，並不是代替談話式的風格的一個好辦法，而我們的許多事情就是在談話中解決的。但是談話式的風格需要一個相當小的空間，同時應當在重要的場合下，有一種擁擠和緊迫的感覺，而且還應當使人們有這種感覺：許多重要的問題在下院談過了，重大的事情也在那裡及時地決定了。 不管怎樣，這個問題像我所希望的那樣解決了。 在這些繁忙的日子裡，我想到，既然我們的最後勝利現在看來已有把握，我們應當詳細研究隨著勝利的來臨將要同時發生的一些問題。關於這些已隱約出現在我們面前的問題，我曾擬了兩份備忘錄給我的同僚們，現在抄錄如下，作為本章的結束。 戰爭時期過渡時期和平時期 首相兼國防大臣的備忘錄 一九四三年十月十九日 英皇陛下政府應該作好準備，以便處理在戰爭結束時落在我們身上的任務。緊急的需要是： （1）制定妥善的復員計劃，同時應當考慮到我們無疑地要在敵人的領土內保持相當數量的駐軍。 （2）應當為本島居民提供超過戰時定量標準的糧食供應。 （3）應當重新開展出口貿易和恢復我們的商船隊。 （4）應當普遍地將工業從戰時生產轉為平時生產，而且，最重要的是，（5）在過渡期間，應為身體健康、希望就業的人，尤其是退伍軍人，提供就業機會。 關於戰後數年內糧食和就業這兩個最高目標所需要的任何決定，我們現在就必須作出，不論它是否會牽涉到立法手續，而且也不論它是否會引起爭論。 二‧與這些方面有關的各部和各委員會已經作了許多工作。我們必須注意：不要讓這些緊急的實際任務被政黨政治攪亂和掩蓋起來，或者由於無盡無休地討論關於建立新的世界秩序的長期計劃，而被擱置起來。 三‧事實上，存在著三個階段，即： （1）戰爭階段， （2）過渡階段，以及 （3）和平與自由階段。 本屆政府和議會完全有資格為過渡期間作好一切必需的準備；如果發現我們沒有盡到自己的責任，我們對此應該嚴肅負責。在過渡期間（一切準備工作到時將會完成），應當盡早地舉行大選，以便選民對於我們戰後和過渡時期以後的社會將要採取的形式，表示他們的意願。 四‧我們不知道，這次選舉是否將根據現在組成聯合政府的各個政黨經過協議所提出的一個綱領來進行競選，還是必須由下院的本屆多數黨領袖在選民的面前提出他們自己的綱領。不管採用哪種辦法，很可能會宣佈一個四年計劃。這個四年計劃，除了實行過渡時期中所必需的許多重大的行政措施外，同時也包括一系列關於發展和改革的巨大決定。無論從這個或那個角度來看，這些關於發展和改革的決定，將塑造我們戰後和過渡時期以後的社會形式，因此，新議會是大有工作可做的。 五‧同時，還有一些重要的政策，例如關於教育、社會保險，以及我們遭到毀壞的住宅和城市的重建問題等等，已經取得或將要取得相當廣泛的大體上一致的意見。在目前的戰爭時期，應當對這些措施盡量做好準備工作，而且要通過任何必要的初步的法案，以便在過渡時期的最初階段就能實行。 六‧現在很難預料，在對德戰爭結束以後，對日戰爭究竟要持續多長時間。也許比較妥當的辦法是，將過渡時期確定為擊敗德國以後的兩年，或從一九四四年一月一日起以後的四年，以便據此進行工作，不論是哪一個時期先結束。 一個月以後，我決定任命一位建設大臣，他的辦公地點將成為過渡時期各項計劃的中心。伍爾頓勳爵領導糧食部的工作，曾獲得人們廣泛的滿意和普遍的信任。無論從哪方面來說，他似乎具備能夠協調和推動許多有關部門活動的才幹和經驗。他於十一月十二日就職。