Mr. Hope referred briefly to the main points of the paper circulated and Lord Perth endorsed the views and conclusions expressed in it.
Sir Walter Monckton questioned whether the paper did not lead to dangerous conclusions in relation to the short term political aspect of our policy. The necessity at present was an offensive rather than a defensive attitude and in his view there was essential opposition between defence of existing institutions, which he felt was implied in the paper and particularly in conclusion 3, and the new revolutionary spirit which he regarded a manifest in every belligerent country. Lord Perth thought this view was contrary to those expressed by the Foreign Secretary. He thought that the effect of overtly supporting Marxism would be fatal and that we ought not to say that we were out for revolution He thought it very important to keep the good will of the Catholics and suggested that the recent Encyclicals of the Pope might be studied with advantage in order that the Catholic view of the present state of affairs might be more clearly distinguished from that of the defensive conservatism referred to by Sir Walter Monckton. Mr. Hugh Martin said that as a representative of a confession other than Roman Catholic he had some sympathy with Sir Walter Monckton's point of view. He felt strongly that Christianity should not be identified with the status quo. It should be made clear that we were not fighting for the defence of pre-war institutions but for a new order. Lord Perth entirely agreed with this statement of the position. Mr. Radcliffe thought that the recommendation of the paper were very dangerous and pointed out that for millions of people militant socialism was a religion. It was therefore erroneous to say that broad and high levels could not achieved without adopting a position contrary to that of militant Socialism, for this reason he thought that the first recommendation should be condemned. He thought that the second recommendation was a commonplace and the third would be ruinous and alienate Russia for good and all. The fourth he considered wholly satisfactory if it were possible to persuade the Catholic Church, the Empire and the United States that they were actually in a moral alliance against Nazidom, and that Russia was not excluded from it. Mr. Cowan thought that the discussion was dangerous as the country was about equally divided for and against the two opposing arguments. He thought it was desirable that we should base ourselves on the position taken up by Lord Halifax. Thus we should not cut across Russian ideology. Mr Nicolson thought we were points of view but how we should direct our propaganda in order to conciliate Catholic opinion. He thought we should be careful of Catholic opinion
306
even if we should agree with the view expressed by Sir Walter Monckton and Mr. Radcliffe. He was opposed to the suggestion that we should base our attitude on the statements of the Foreign Secretary, which he thought were purposely vague on this occasion. Greater precision was desirable.
The Director General considered that the next step was another declaration of policy from the Cabinet which was being invited by the paper now in preparation by the Minister.
Sir Frederick Whyte expressed the view that the next phase might well be the rise of revolutionary movements in the occupied countries of Europe which would appear to the U.S.A. as nationalist movements, the driving force of which might well be the motives referred to by Sir Walter Monckton. It would be very dangerous to state in advance that we disagreed with these principles. Our only allies in the U.S.A. will be those who in fact agree with them.
2.
DR. REVES' PLAN
Mr. Kirkpatrick stated that he was writing a short memorandum on the plan recently submitted by Dr. Reves.
3.
ANNUAL LEAVE AND DELAYS
The Director General referred to a recent meeting of heads of Departments under the chairmanship of Sir Horace Wilson. The meeting dealt with the question of leave, and in this connection he expressed the view that a certain amount of leave should be taken. All staff should have a week, and those who had been specially heavily engaged might take a fortnight subject to the exigencies of the Departments. The sooner this leave was taken the better. He also referred to the question of delays. The Deputy Secretary had already said that in his view the procedure in the Ministry did not lay itself open to this charge. But the Director General said he was very anxious that matters should be so organised that no criticism could be directed towards us on this point.
4.
ADVERTISING “WHAT DO I DO” IN ‘THE TIMES’
Sir Kenneth Clark reported that the phrase the “Silent Column” was to be removed from the advertisement, but asked if it was desirable that the whole advertisement campaign should cease. Mr. Lints Smith said that he did not think the papers would object to cancellation, Mr. Nicolson suggested that use should be made of the Prime Minister's own words for the campaign, but Mr. Tree thought it would be politically wise to cancel the present arrangements. Mr. Macadam said that he thought it unwise to call off the campaign at once, since the Ministry had in the past bowed to public opposition and had not gained advantage thereby. Lord Davidson pointed out that the objections were to the form and not to the substance of the advertisement, and he thought we should cut out the words objected to and substitute the Prime Minister's words. After discussion it was agreed that this should be done and that the campaign should be maintained till the end of the week, when it would terminate.
The Director General drew attention to the advertisement “What do I do” appearing in the “Times” and thought that different wording should be adopted. In this case. Sir Kenneth Clark undertook to recommend to Crawfords that wording more suitable to the readers of the “Times” should be put in.
5.
L.D. V
.
The Director General referred to the shortage of recruits for the L.D.V. and said that if more people were enrolled the
307
duties would be less onerous. He invited Directors to call the attention of their staff to this and try to improve the membership.
6.
SHORTAGE OF FOOD IN EUROPE
Mr. Nicolson said that he had been in touch with the Ministry of Economic Warfare who were anxious to know what we are doing in the way of counter propaganda in the event of famine in Europe. He suggested that a Joint Committee might be formed. Mr. Kirkpatrick thought that we should have difficulty with the U.S.A., the Poles and the Belgians, and suggested that we should invite the Belgians and the Poles to state their case. This course would offer the hope of some delay. In the meantime, Mr. Hoover might be invited to prepare for the postwar period. It was decided that Mr. Nicolson, Mr. Kirkpatrick and Sir Frederick Whyte and the Ministry of Economic Warfare should combine to consider the course of action. In answer to a suggestion by Lord Perth particular attention should be paid to the position of Norway and unoccupied France.
DECISIONS
MEMBER CONCERNED
1. That it should be recommended to Crawfords that wording more suitable to readers of the “Times” should be substituted in the “What do I do” advertisement.
Sir Kenneth Clark
2. That Mr. Nicolson, Mr. Kirkpatrick, Sir Frederick Whyte and the Ministry of Economic Warfare should combine to consider a course of action to be taken in regard to counter propaganda about the food shortage in Europe.
