使用者:Cypp0847/邱吉爾看守內閣
| Cypp0847/邱吉爾看守內閣 | |
|---|---|
 英國看守政府 | |
| 1945年5月至7月 | |
 1945年6月27日， 溫斯頓·邱吉爾在大選競選期間發言 | |
| 建立日期 | 1945年5月23日 |
| 解散日期 | 1945年7月26日 |
| 組織與人物 | |
| 英王 | 喬治六世 |
| 首相 | 溫斯頓·邱吉爾 |
| 歷任首腦 | 1940–1945 |
| 副政府首腦 | 沒有[a] |
| 成員總數 | 92人 |
| 議會地位 | 多數派政府 |
| 反對黨 | 工黨 |
| 反對黨領袖 | 克萊曼·艾德禮 |
| 歷史 | |
| 卸任選舉 | 1945年大選 |
| 議會任期 | 37th UK Parliament |
| 前任 | 邱吉爾戰時內閣 |
| 繼任 | 艾德禮內閣 |
邱吉爾看守內閣（英語：Churchill caretaker ministry）是第二次世界大戰期間的英國內閣，任期為1945年5月23日至7月26日，時任首相為保守黨黨魁溫斯頓·邱吉爾。
邱吉爾在1940年5月10日首次拜相，組成跨黨派聯盟戰時內閣，閣員來自保守黨、工黨及自由黨的領導層。納粹德國投降後，聯盟內的黨派未能就是否續任至日本戰敗而達成共識，內閣因而倒台。
看守政府繼續在遠東迎戰日本的同時，首相將重心放在波茨坦會議，因為他屆時將連同外交大臣艾登會見蘇聯領導人史太林和美國總統杜魯門。至於國內政策重點則是國家的戰後復甦，包括教育、衛生、房屋、工業、社會福利各方面的改革。同年7月5日，英國舉行十年來首場大選。各黨派在競選期間聚焦上述議題，爭取選民支持。由於大量駐紮國外的軍人的選票需時運回英國，因此選舉結果要直至7月5日才能公佈。隨著工黨在選舉中大勝，邱吉爾因而辭任首相，由他的戰時內閣副手克萊曼·艾德禮接任，籌組工黨政府.
背景
[編輯]1935年大選讓保守黨取得足夠有餘的席次籌組政府，由史丹利·鮑德溫出任首相一職[1]。1937年5月，鮑德溫退休後，接任的內維爾·張伯倫延續前朝政府的綏靖主義政策，應對日德意的威脅[2]。1938年，張伯倫與納粹德國元首希特勒簽署《慕尼黑協定》後，他警覺到德國的侵略之心日益膨脹，因而在1939年3月簽署《英波軍事同盟》，承諾一旦波蘭遭受攻擊，英國將會出手協防[3]。波蘭被納粹德國入侵後，張伯倫在1939年9月3日向納粹德國宣戰，繼而組成戰時內閣。邱吉爾雖然自1929年6月起已無供職，但仍獲邀入閣出任第一海軍大臣[4]。
1940年春季，德國成功入侵挪威，國內更加不滿張伯倫的領導能力。5月8日，下議院進行挪威辯論期間，在野的工黨要求進行表決，被視為是實際上的不信任動議。雖然政府渡過一劫，但議會內的優勢已經由213席急跌至81席，無疑是對張伯倫的一大打擊[5]。
5月10日，德國開始入侵荷蘭和比利時。張伯倫一度考慮請辭掛冠，但認為時機不當而放棄此想法[6]。同日，工黨決定不會加入張伯倫領導下的全國聯盟，但會加入由保守黨另有其人出任首相的政府[7]。張伯倫及後請辭，並進言英王任命邱吉爾為繼任人。新任英揆邱吉爾馬上籌組全國聯盟，讓工黨和自由黨的領軍人物出任內閣的關鍵職位[7]。縱然曾經歷嚴重挫敗，戰時內閣仍然穩陣，最終與美蘇合作擊敗納粹德國[8]。
擴大聯盟
[編輯]
1944年10月，邱吉爾在下議院發表演說，動議國會延任多一年，以待德國甚至日本戰敗。英國自1935年後已沒舉行國會選舉，而邱吉爾亦決定，當戰事結束後，就會盡快舉行大選。邱吉爾未能估計對日戰爭何時了結，但他有信心德國會在明年夏季前敗仗，因此他告訴在席議員：「我們必須視結束納粹主義戰爭為確定何時舉行下場大選的指標」[9]。
1945年4月初，英國在歐洲戰場的勝利在即，邱吉爾會見副首相兼工黨黨魁克萊曼·艾德禮，商討戰時內閣的未來去向。艾德禮原定在4月17日起程前往美國，出席成立聯合國的舊金山會議，預計5月16日才會返國。同行的還有內閣大臣安東尼·艾登、傅羅倫絲·何士保和愛倫·韋健臣。邱吉爾向艾德禮保證，國會不會在他們仍未返國前解散。5月8日歐戰勝利紀念日之後，邱吉爾改變了提前大選的想法，建議聯盟執政至日本戰敗[10]。
不過，屬工黨的內政大臣赫伯特·莫里森卻在此時公佈題為《讓我們面對未來》的聲明，被視為選舉的競選宣言。多名保守黨中人隨之回應。拉票活動起初不算熱烈，更在4月30日希特勒死亡後一度沉寂，但到歐戰勝利紀念日後重拾步伐[11]。5月11日，邱吉爾會見莫里森以及勞工國務大臣安內斯·貝凡，透露自己希望現屆政府執政至日本戰敗[12]。二人則轉述工黨全國執行委員會（全國執委會）的取態，認為無論遠東戰況如何，大選都應該在10月舉行，因為對日戰爭可能還要持續十八個月[12][13]。工黨拒絕聯盟執政至10月後，保守黨內部開始呼籲邱吉爾在6月或7月舉行選舉。比華博勳爵和布蘭登·白勤等保守黨高層想藉邱吉爾「打贏仗」的個人魅力，從中獲益[9]。反之，工黨希望邱吉爾的支持度回落。同黨的莫里森亦指出，最新和較為準確的選民數字會在10月前出爐[13]。
艾登和艾德禮在5月16日回國後，艾德禮在當晚與邱吉爾會面。雖然艾德禮支持看守內閣執政至日本戰敗，但他留意到大多數工黨黨員持不同意見[12][14]。邱吉爾致函全國執委會，提出折衷方案，當中包括貝凡加入的社會改革承諾，但全國執委會仍然認為不足以說服他們轉軚。5月20日週日，全國執委會通過支持在10月舉行全國大選，決議翌日獲絕大多數大會代表贊成[15][14]，艾德禮之後致電邱吉爾告知工黨的決定。在比華博透過旗下報章煽風點火下，二人開始不和[16]。
5月23日週三中午，邱吉爾向英王喬治六世呈交辭呈[17]。他執意回府唐寧街，讓外界以為英王仍能選擇邀請何人籌組新政府。下午四點，邱吉爾再獲白金漢宮召見，英王邀請他籌組新一任政府，直至選舉結果塵埃落定；邱吉爾決定接受[18][19]。當局同意國會將於6月15日解散，7月5日舉行大選。由於有大量現役軍人身在海外，因此大選點票只會在7月26日開始，以待收集軍人的選票[16]。
籌組內閣
[編輯].jpg){kind=icon}
邱吉爾的新政府雖然通稱「看守內閣」，但正式名稱仍為「國民政府」，意味新政府延續三十年代起由保守黨主導的跨黨派聯盟。新政府亦繼續是保守黨閣員為主，獲細黨國民自由黨以及約翰·安德森爵士等人支持[20]。邱吉爾在5月26日早上完成任命所有閣僚後，便偕同妻子克萊曼婷駕車前往他的選區活特福德，發表首次競選演說[18]。他回應「看守」暱稱時表示：「他們都叫我們『看守者』；我們包容這個稱號，因為這代表我們要好好看管所有影響英國福祉和英國各階層的所有事物[20][18]。」5月28日，邱吉爾正式獲英王再次任命為首相[16]。
此後，工黨與自由黨的國會議員組成反對黨，除了身在內閣的自由黨議員桂廉·萊德·喬治。喬治自1942年6月起出任燃料及電力國務大臣，他亦應邱吉爾邀請留任看守內閣。邱吉爾籌組內閣時的主要工作是撤換所有工黨和自由黨的大臣，並沒有大規模重整政府架構，只新增了兩個職位：其一是彼得·霍尼戈夫出任的戰爭交通部國會秘書；其二是另一位外交政務副大臣，任命了盧福勳爵去分擔鄧格拉斯勳爵的工作[21]。
國內事件
[編輯]由於大選在即，因此國會在看守內閣執政時的會期只有十四日，由5月29日去到6月15日，期間曾發生過一些爭議。6月7日，邱吉爾拒絕下議院的要求，公開雅爾達會議的所有討論事宜，僅強調沒有任何密約[22]。國會會期中止在6月15日中止前的一刻，總共有27項法令獲御准[b]，全都是戰時內閣執政期間國會動議和辯論的法案，當中尤以重要的是《1945年家庭津貼法令》。 which came into effect on 6 August 1946. This Act is important as the firs UK law to provide child benefit and it is seen as a tribute to the work done over thirty years by Eleanor Rathbone who championed the family allowance cause.[24][c]
The government was actively involved in monitoring levels of rationing. Key to this was the Ministry of Food under John Llewellin and his parliamentary secretary, Florence Horsbrugh. A number of changes were actioned on 27 May, three weeks after VE Day, including cuts in the bacon ration from 4oz to 3oz per week, in the cooking fat ration from 2oz to 1oz, and a one-eighth cut in the soap ration, except for babies and young children.[26][27] There was good news on 1 June for civilian motorists, though very few people owned private cars in 1945, when the basic petrol ration for civilians was restored. It had been abolished on 1 July 1942 when petrol consumption was restricted to military and industrial use only.[27] There was otherwise very little change with most food products continuing to be rationed as during the war. The same applied to clothing until 1949, and the Utility Clothing Scheme continued under its "Make Do and Mend" ethos.[27]
There was little opportunity within such a short Parliament, and with an election campaign underway, for any effective measures to be brought forward by the caretaker administration and so, for the most part, they kept a watching brief while trying to convince the electorate that they would get down to the real business after the election. With this in mind, a cornerstone of the Conservative manifesto was implementation of the coalition government's Four-Year Plan.[28] According to Martin Gilbert, Churchill was influenced in this by the views of his daughter Sarah.[28] The Four-Year Plan had been prepared two years earlier by William Beveridge and called for the creation of the National Health Service (NHS) and the welfare state. These measures were also part of the Labour manifesto and Churchill, encouraged by Sarah and others, decided to go further by promising free milk for the under-fives and a housing programme to ensure "homes for all".[28][d]
國際事件
[編輯]續迎戰日本
[編輯]The war against Japan continued for the duration of the caretaker ministry and ended on 15 August, three weeks after Churchill's resignation.[30] Even before the defeat of Germany, Churchill had told the Americans that he wanted the Royal Navy to play a prominent role in the defeat of Japan and the liberation of Britain's Asian colonies, especially Singapore. The Americans were unenthusiastic, suspecting that Churchill's intentions were primarily imperialist. Neither Franklin Roosevelt nor Harry Truman had any intention of helping to sustain the British Empire.[31]
In their successful campaigns of 1944 and the early months of 1945, the British Army and its allies had mostly cleared Burma of Japanese forces by May 1945. Rangoon had fallen to the Allies on 2 May following the Battle of Elephant Point. While Churchill hoped for a triumphant re-entry to Singapore,[31] its recovery was logistically difficult and it remained under Japanese control until 12 September when it was finally recovered, following the Japanese surrender, by British forces in Operation Tiderace.[32]
波茨坦會議
[編輯]_speaks_with_Soviet_Prime_Minister_Josef_Stalin_(at_left)_and_British_Prime_Minister_Winston..._-_NARA_-_198775.jpg)
Churchill was Great Britain's representative at the post-war Potsdam Conference when it opened on 17 July. It was a "Big Three" event with Joseph Stalin representing the Soviet Union and President Harry Truman the United States. Ever since the conference was first proposed, Churchill had worried about the countries of eastern Europe, especially Poland, which had been overrun by the Red Army.[33] He was accompanied at the sessions not only by Eden as Foreign Secretary but also by Attlee, pending the result of the general election held on 5 July.[34][35] They attended nine sessions in nine days before returning to England for their election counts. After the landslide Labour victory, Attlee returned to Potsdam with Ernest Bevin as the new Foreign Secretary and there were a further five days of discussion.[36]
According to Eden, Churchill's performance at Potsdam was "appalling" because he was unprepared and verbose. Eden said Churchill upset the Chinese, exasperated the Americans and was easily led by Stalin, whom he was supposed to be resisting.[37] This negative version of events is contradicted by Gilbert who describes Churchill's eager involvement in discussions with Stalin and Truman. Their main topics were the successful testing by the Americans of the atom bomb and the demarcation of a new frontier between Poland and East Germany. Stalin insisted on extending the frontier westward to the Oder and Western Neisse rivers, forming the Oder–Neisse line and thus incorporating most of Silesia into Poland. Churchill and Truman opposed this proposal but to no avail. Gilbert does recount that Field Marshal Montgomery was worried about Churchill's health, saying in a letter that Churchill had "put on ten years since I last saw him".[38]
黎凡特危機
[編輯]Earlier, on 31 May, Churchill and Eden had intervened in the so-called Levant Crisis which had been initiated by French General Charles de Gaulle. Acting as head of the French Provisional Government, de Gaulle had ordered French forces to establish an air base in Syria and a naval base in Lebanon. The action provoked a nationalist outbreak in both countries and France responded with an armed retaliation, leading to many civilian deaths. With the situation escalating out of control, Churchill gave de Gaulle an ultimatum to desist. This was ignored and British forces from neighbouring Transjordan were mobilised to restore order. The French, heavily outnumbered, had no option but to return to their bases. A diplomatic row broke out and Churchill reportedly told a colleague that de Gaulle was "a great danger to peace and for Great Britain".[39]
首相請辭
[編輯]
Churchill mishandled the election campaign by resorting to party politics and trying to denigrate Labour.[40] On 4 June, he committed a serious political gaffe by saying in a radio broadcast that a Labour government would require "some form of Gestapo" to enforce its agenda:[41][42][43]
No Socialist Government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.
It backfired badly and Attlee made political capital by saying in his reply broadcast next day: "The voice we heard last night was that of Mr Churchill, but the mind was that of Lord Beaverbrook". Roy Jenkins says that this broadcast was "the making of Attlee".[44] Richard Toye, writing in 2010, said the Gestapo speech had retained all of the notoriety it gained at the time of delivery. Many of Churchill's colleagues and supporters were appalled by it, including Leo Amery who praised Attlee's "adroit reply to Winston's rhodomontade".[45] The broadcast impacted the electorate's perception of Churchill as their national leader, causing him to lose credibility. The problem was that a national leader was expected to behave differently to a party leader during an election and Churchill failed to strike the right balance.[46]
Nevertheless, although the Gestapo speech created a negative response, Churchill personally retained a very high approval rating in opinion polls and was still expected to win the election.[42] The main reason for his defeat was underlying discontent with, and suspicion of, the Conservative party. There was widespread dissatisfaction with the Conservative-dominated government of the 1930s and, recognising the public mood, Labour ran a very effective campaign which focused on the real issues facing the British people in peacetime – the 1930s had been an era of poverty and mass unemployment, so Labour's manifesto promised full employment, improved housing and the provision of free medical services.[42] These issues were foremost in the minds of the voters and Labour was trusted to resolve them.[42]
Churchill's principal theme in the election campaign was always the perils inherent, as he saw them, in socialism, but the Conservatives had to offer an alternative and Churchill stressed to his colleagues that a Conservative government must be constructive.[47] He saw the housing shortage as the main issue and announced his commitment to rebuilding in a broadcast on 13 June but, as with the Gestapo speech on 4 June, he ruined the effect by again insisting that Labour would deploy some form of political police to control the nation.[28] On 3 July, he called for an intensive effort by his Cabinet colleagues to promote housebuilding[48] and prepare legislation for both national insurance and the NHS, but his concerns in these areas were unknown by the electorate to the extent that, when he addressed an audience in the Labour stronghold of Walthamstow that evening, he was almost forced to abandon the event because of booing and heckling.[49] Many commentators felt that Churchill's election speeches lacked "vim" and there is a view that he was much more interested in what was happening in eastern Europe than in Great Britain, but eastern Europe was Churchill's primary concern at Potsdam.[50]
Polling day was on 5 July and, after the agreed delay for collection of the overseas service votes, the results were declared on 26 July.[16] The outcome was a landslide victory for the Labour Party with a Commons majority of 146 over all other parties.[51] Churchill had a constitutional right to remain in office until defeated by a no confidence vote in the House of Commons. He wanted to exercise this right, partly so he could return to Potsdam as prime minister, but instead was persuaded to resign that evening and was succeeded by Attlee.[51][52][53][54]
The caretaker ministry's short term of office means that a critical assessment of its performance is difficult but Stuart Ball credits Churchill as "a good constructor of cabinets" and says that, although the 1945 government is sometimes unfairly dismissed, "it was a sound and capable team".[55] Gilbert points out that the ministry's efforts were overshadowed by the general election in which Churchill himself was the focus of public interest.[49]
內閣大臣
[編輯]This table lists those ministers who held Cabinet membership in the caretaker ministry.[21] Many retained roles they held in the war ministry and these are marked in situ with the date of their original appointment. For new appointments, their predecessor's name is given.
閣外大臣
[編輯]This table lists those ministers who held non-Cabinet roles in the caretaker ministry.[21] Some retained roles they held in the war ministry and these are marked in situ with the date of their original appointment. For new appointments, their predecessor's name is given.
註釋
[編輯]- ^ 時任保守黨副黨魁安東尼·艾登並沒有出任英國副首相。
- ^ 可透過《議會議事錄》查證[23]。
- ^ In his closing speech to Parliament, the King said that "legislation has been passed to provide for a scheme of family allowances, in which the families of serving men will be included".[25]
- ^ The housing shortage was still the primary domestic issue when Churchill formed his third ministry in 1951 and future prime minister Harold Macmillan was appointed Minister of Housing and Local Government with a commitment to build 300,000 new houses per annum, a target he achieved.[29]
參考文獻
[編輯]- ^ Jenkins 2001，第485–486頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第514–515頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第543頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第551–552頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第576–582頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第583頁.
- ^ 7.0 7.1 Jenkins 2001，第586頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第585頁.
- ^ 9.0 9.1 Hermiston 2016，第356頁.
- ^ Hermiston 2016，第356–357頁.
- ^ Hermiston 2016，第357頁.
- ^ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Hermiston 2016，第358頁.
- ^ 13.0 13.1 Pelling 1980，第401頁.
- ^ 14.0 14.1 Pelling 1980，第402頁.
- ^ Hermiston 2016，第359頁.
- ^ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 Hermiston 2016，第360頁.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第845–846頁.
- ^ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Gilbert 1991，第846頁.
- ^ Roberts, Andrew. Churchill: Walking with Destiny. London: Allen Lane. 2018: 879. ISBN 978-02-41205-63-1.
- ^ 20.0 20.1 Hermiston 2016，第364頁.
- ^ 21.0 21.1 21.2 Butler & Butler 1994，第17–20頁.
- ^ Leonard, Thomas M. Day By Day: The Forties. New York: Facts On File, Inc. 1977: 500. ISBN 978-0-87196-375-8.
- ^ Royal Assent. Hansard, House of Commons, 5th Series, vol. 411, cols 1904–1905. 1945-06-15 [2020-09-04].
- ^ Cross, Rupert. The Family Allowances Act, 1945. The Modern Law Review (London School of Economics & Political Science). October 1946, 9 (3): 284–289. JSTOR 1089952.
- ^ His Majesty's Most Gracious Speech. Hansard, House of Commons, 5th Series, vol. 411, cols 1905–1910. 1945-06-15 [2020-09-04].
- ^ Tingle, Rory. 75 years on from rationing, what did we learn?. The Independent (London: Independent Digital News & Media Limited). 2015-01-08.
- ^ 27.0 27.1 27.2 Zweiniger-Bargielowska, Ina. Rationing, Austerity and the Conservative Party Recovery after 1945. The Historical Journal (Cambridge University Press). March 1994, 37 (1): 173–197. JSTOR 2640057. doi:10.1017/S0018246X00014758.
- ^ 28.0 28.1 28.2 28.3 Gilbert 1991，第847頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第844–845頁.
- ^ Text of Hirohito's Radio Rescript. The New York Times (New York City). 1945-08-15: 3 [2020-07-28].
- ^ 31.0 31.1 Jenkins 2001，第756頁.
- ^ Park, Keith. Air Operations in South East Asia 3rd May 1945 to 12th September 1945 (PDF). London: War Office. August 1946. published in 第39202號憲報. 倫敦憲報 (Supplement). 1951-04-13.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第848–849頁.
- ^ Pelling 1980，第404頁.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第848頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第795–796頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第796頁.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第850–854頁.
- ^ Fenby, Jonathan. The General: Charles de Gaulle and the France he saved. London: Simon & Schuster. 2011: 42–47. ISBN 978-18-47394-10-1.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第791–795頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第792頁.
- ^ 42.0 42.1 42.2 42.3 Addison, Paul. Why Churchill Lost in 1945. BBC History. BBC. 2011-02-17 [2020-06-04].
- ^ Toye 2010，第655頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第793頁.
- ^ Toye 2010，第655–656頁.
- ^ Toye 2010，第679–680頁.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第846–847頁.
- ^ Pelling 1980，第413頁.
- ^ 49.0 49.1 Gilbert 1991，第849頁.
- ^ Gilbert 1991，第847–848頁.
- ^ 51.0 51.1 Gilbert 1991，第855頁.
- ^ Hermiston 2016，第366–367頁.
- ^ Jenkins 2001，第798–799頁.
- ^ Pelling 1980，第408頁.
- ^ Ball, Stuart. Churchill and the Conservative Party. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (Cambridge University Press). 2001, 11: 328. JSTOR 3679426. S2CID 153860359. doi:10.1017/S0080440101000160.
Bibliography
[編輯]- Butler, David; Butler, Gareth. British Political Facts 1900–1994 7. Basingstoke and London: The Macmillan Press. 1994. ISBN 978-03-12121-47-1.
- Gilbert, Martin. Churchill: A Life. London: Heinemann. 1991. ISBN 978-04-34291-83-0.
- Hermiston, Roger. All Behind You, Winston – Churchill's Great Coalition, 1940–45. London: Aurum Press. 2016. ISBN 978-17-81316-64-1.
- Jenkins, Roy. Churchill. London: Macmillan Press. 2001. ISBN 978-03-30488-05-1.
- Pelling, Henry. The 1945 General Election Reconsidered. The Historical Journal (Cambridge University Press). June 1980, 23 (2): 399–414. JSTOR 2638675. doi:10.1017/S0018246X0002433X.
- Toye, Richard. Winston Churchill's "Crazy Broadcast": Party, Nation, and the 1945 Gestapo Speech. Journal of British Studies (Cambridge University Press). July 2010, 49 (3): 655–680. JSTOR 23265382. doi:10.1086/652014. hdl:10871/9424
.
延伸閱讀
[編輯]- Best, Geoffrey. Churchill: A Study in Greatness. London: Bloomsbury. 2001. ISBN 978-18-52852-53-5.
- Neiberg, Michael. Potsdam: The End of World War II and the Remaking of Europe. New York City: Basic Books. 2015. ISBN 978-04-65075-25-6.
- Nicol, Patricia. Sucking Eggs. London: Vintage Books. 2010. ISBN 978-00-99521-12-9.
| 前任： Churchill war ministry |
Government of the United Kingdom 1945 |
繼任： First Attlee ministry |