Editing Hugh Gaitskell (section)

=== Bevan's resignation ===
Gaitskell and Attlee warned of risks that the rearmament programme might not be fully implemented. Gaitskell warned the Economic Policy Committee (3 April 1951) of the shortage of machine tools, and stated that some could be imported from the US but that this would weaken the balance of payments.<ref name="Dell 1997, p.151">Dell 1997, p.151</ref>

A very angry Bevan saw the charges as a blow to the principle of a free health service, telling a heckler while he was making a speech in [[Bermondsey]] (3 April 1951) that he would resign rather than accept health charges. Gaitskell, besides the obvious need for a new Chancellor to assert his authority, saw this as a deliberate attempt to bounce the Cabinet publicly, telling Dalton that Bevan's "influence was very much exaggerated" and that he might split the Labour Party as [[David Lloyd George|Lloyd George]] had the Liberals.<ref name="Campbell 2010, p207-8" />

In two long Cabinet meetings on 9 April Bevan found himself supported only by Harold Wilson.<ref name="Campbell 2010, p208-9">Campbell 2010, p208-9</ref> [[Herbert Morrison]], who was chairing the Cabinet whilst Attlee was being treated in hospital, again proposed a compromise that there be an agreed ceiling on public spending but no NHS charges.<ref name="Matthew 2004, p.289">Matthew 2004, p.289</ref> Gaitskell was determined that there would not be an open-ended commitment to welfare spending at the expense of economic investment or rearmament, and rejected Morrison's proposal.<ref name="Matthew 2004, p.289" /> At the second meeting, Gaitskell threatened to resign, but quietly and without a public fuss, if he did not have the backing of the Cabinet; the resignation of the Chancellor on the eve of the budget would have caused a political crisis. Douglas Jay and others attempted in vain to persuade Gaitskell to compromise, but he refused, arguing that two members of the Cabinet should not be allowed to dictate to eighteen, although he agreed not to specify just yet the date at which the charges would come into effect.<ref name="Campbell 2010, p208-9" /> A final attempt by Attlee to negotiate a compromise from his sickbed (10 April) came to nothing.<ref name="Dell 1997, p.148-9" /> The affair brought Gaitskell close to physical and emotional collapse.<ref name="Matthew 2004, p.289" />

Gaitskell won the admiration of Treasury officials for his stance: on the morning of the budget Sir Edward Bridges came to tell him of the respect he had earned in the department and that it was "the best day we have had in the Treasury for ten years". Gaitskell recorded that Bridges, Plowden, Leslie (Head of Information) and Armstrong were all urging him to stand firm and that he was "overcome with emotion" at Armstrong's words.<ref>Dell 1997, p.149</ref>

Gaitskell's budget was praised at the time. His predecessor Stafford Cripps wrote to him praising him for not giving in to "political expediency", whilst he was supported in public by two younger MPs later to be staunch allies, [[Roy Jenkins]] and [[Anthony Crosland]].<ref>Dell 1997, p.150</ref> After the budget [[Tony Benn]], who was on the right of the Labour Party at that time, recorded the atmosphere at the party meeting (i.e. a meeting of Labour MPs) on 11 April as "sheer relief" that it had not been worse; the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) strongly supported the budget. However, Bevan soon rejected Gaitskell's proposed compromise that it be announced that the health charges were not to be permanent as "a bromide". Bevan's ally [[Michael Foot]] wrote an editorial in ''[[Tribune (magazine)|Tribune]]'' comparing Gaitskell to [[Philip Snowden, 1st Viscount Snowden|Philip Snowden]] (the Chancellor whose cuts in 1931 had brought down the [[Second MacDonald ministry|Second Labour Government]], after which he and other leading members of the Cabinet entered into the Tory-dominated [[National Government (United Kingdom)|National Government]]). Bevan resigned on 21 April, as did Harold Wilson and [[John Freeman (British politician)|John Freeman]].<ref>Campbell 2010, p210</ref>

Gaitskell defended his budget at the party meeting on 24 April. He said it was still too early to tell if the rearmament programme was actually achievable.<ref name="Dell 1997, p.151" /> Benn commented after the meeting on how Gaitskell's greatness arose from his combination of "intellectual ability and political forcefulness". Bevan then made an angry speech which did not impress many of the PLP.<ref>Campbell 2010, p212-3</ref>