Oral Answers to Questions — Official Historians

– in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 23 June 1964.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Emrys Hughes Mr Emrys Hughes , South Ayrshire 12:00, 23 June 1964

asked the Prime Minister how many official historians he has appointed.

Photo of Sir Alec Douglas-Home Sir Alec Douglas-Home , Kinross and West Perthshire

None, Sir. The last appointment was in November, 1962.

Photo of Mr Emrys Hughes Mr Emrys Hughes , South Ayrshire

Why is the Prime Minister so prejudiced against history and historians? Does not he think that he has a splendid chance to show that the Tory Government have nothing to fear and nothing to apologise for about Suez by letting us have the truth? Does he not believe that, even if he has no place in politics after the next election, he will have a place in history?

Photo of Sir Alec Douglas-Home Sir Alec Douglas-Home , Kinross and West Perthshire

I am beginning to think that the hon. Gentleman wants the job; but I think that it would be a very biassed history that he would write.

Photo of Mr Charles Fletcher-Cooke Mr Charles Fletcher-Cooke , Darwen

Will my right hon. Friend consider paying historians on piece rates rather than by time? Is it not a fact that a great many of these official historians were appointed a long time ago and are happily soldiering on year after year without producing very much? Could my right hon. Friend bring some urgency into the matter by making their method of payment more attractive?

Photo of Sir Alec Douglas-Home Sir Alec Douglas-Home , Kinross and West Perthshire

I had not thought of that, but I am willing to consider any suggestions.

Photo of Miss Irene Ward Miss Irene Ward , Tynemouth

Will my right hon. Friend appoint a special historian to write how the Labour Party managed to produce the nuclear bomb without coming to Parliament?

Prime Minister

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_the_United_Kingdom

Tory

The political party system in the English-speaking world evolved in the 17th century, during the fight over the ascension of James the Second to the Throne. James was a Catholic and a Stuart. Those who argued for Parliamentary supremacy were called Whigs, after a Scottish word whiggamore, meaning "horse-driver," applied to Protestant rebels. It was meant as an insult.

They were opposed by Tories, from the Irish word toraidhe (literally, "pursuer," but commonly applied to highwaymen and cow thieves). It was used — obviously derisively — to refer to those who supported the Crown.

By the mid 1700s, the words Tory and Whig were commonly used to describe two political groupings. Tories supported the Church of England, the Crown, and the country gentry, while Whigs supported the rights of religious dissent and the rising industrial bourgeoisie. In the 19th century, Whigs became Liberals; Tories became Conservatives.