DOCSLIB.ORG

British National Identity in the 21 Century

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
British National Identity in the 21 Century Intercultural Communication Studies XVII: 1 2008 Shi British National Identity in the 21st Century Tongyun Shi, Beijing Foreign Studies University Defining British national identity has never been an easy job as “being British is a variable ideology.” This paper aims to analyze how “Britishness” has been and is being reshaped in the new global context by the new Labor Party since 1997. The New Labor interpreted British national identity as a conjunction of historical past and political future, the past being British cultural heritage and the future referring to a “new and creative Britain.” Facing the challenges of the new information age and the country’s own ethnic and cultural complexity, New Labor led by Tony Blair responded with “rebranding Britain” into a democratic, creative, modern, and plural state. With regard to multiculturalism, great effort has been made to promote diversity, tolerance, and the sharing of core British values for integration. Influenced by recent tension resulted from terrorist activities, Labor is shifting more emphasis on the duty to integrate. Gordon Brown, the new Labor Prime Minister, is promising fairness in tapping everyone’s potential, so as to achieve harmonious fusion of people. The reconstruction of national identity calls efforts from all parts to contribute and compromise. Defining British national identity has never been an easy job. “Being British is a variable ideology,” as depicted by Richard Eyre (2004) in an article published in The Guardian. It is true that there has never been an unchanging definition of “Britishness.” Notions of “Britishness” have been challenged by post-WWII national and international trends such as the loss of empire, black and Asian immigration, entry into the European Union (EU), devolution, globalization, etc. For decades, the country has been facing the challenge of redefining or reconstructing “Britishness” in order to forge a more solid nation-state. At the turn of the century, the interpretation of British national identity as a conjunction of historical past and political future seems a safe ground with certain scholastic consensus. Morley and Robins pointed out in British Cultural Studies that the core about what exactly “Britishness” might be made to mean in the contemporary world is “a central dilemma about how to combine the past and the future” (Morley & Robins, 2001, p. 4). For the purpose of holding the country together and winning elections, appeals to national identity, particularly the defining of “Britishness”, have always been part of the party politics. It seems that to a certain extent it is left for the government to foster a feeling of “Britishness” among its citizens and it is the role of politicians to define what being British means. Therefore this paper aims to analyze how “Britishness” has been and is being reshaped in the new global context by the new Labor Party since 1997. Blair’s New Britain: Democracy, Creativity, Youthfulness In the notion of “Britishness” by Morley and Robins, the past refers to British cultural heritage, which has become “central to our understanding of who we are” (Morley & Robins, 2001, p. 8) and which is what Britain sells to tourists as well as media audiences; the future largely adopts the attitudes, values, and ways of life that the New Labor has been engaged in 102 Intercultural Communication Studies XVII: 1 2008 Shi promoting, best known of which is “creative Britain” (Driver & Martell, 2001, p. 464). To Labor modernizers, the Conservative appeals to “Britishness” they inherited, either the “putting the Great back into Britain” of Mrs. Thatcher or the Baldwinesque images of village cricket and warm beer from John Major in the early 1990s (Driver & Martell, 2002, p. 143), were seen as exclusive, nostalgic, and nationalistic. What they wanted to cultivate was an image of the British as free traders open to new ideas and new ways of living. Creating New Britain Facing the challenge of Britain’s displacement from the center of the world stage and trying to come to terms with its own ethnic and cultural complexity, the New Labor government, led by Tony Blair, in its initial period in office responded with a campaign of “rebranding Britain”—the creation of a “New Britain” with the country’s distinctive strengths in the creative and cultural industries, and the creation of a new image for Britain as “Cool Britannia.” In doing so, it meant drawing deep into the richness of the British character: “Creative. Compassionate. Outward-looking…Old British values, but a new British confidence” (Driver & Martell, 2002, p. 143). With devolution and Europeanization, Blair preferred to identify New Labor’s sense of “Britishness” with tolerance, openness, and internationalism, a kind of “enlightened patriotism” as he called it (Driver & Martell, 2002, p. 144). The strength of “Blairism” is its willingness to confront and keep pace with the changing times. In Tony Blair’s words, the Labor Party had to “modernize or die” (Driver & Martell, 2002, p. 223). The most notable aspect of the Labor modernization program is its constitutional reforms that which derive from a liberal pluralist tradition not shared by the previous Conservative governments. Blair argued in his Britain Speech on March 28, 2000: “True Britishness lies in our values, not unchanging institutions” and “It is not parliamentary sovereignty but parliamentary democracy that is central to British identity.” On devolution, which challenges the centralist culture of British politics, Blair held that “we are stronger together…Let Scotland and Wales do what they do best locally. Let the UK do what it is right to do together” (2000). On connection with Europe, he argued that “standing up for Britain does not mean being anti-Europe.” For him, “standing up for our country means… standing up for the core British values of fair play, creativity, tolerance, and an outward-looking approach to a world” (Blair, 2000). Added by the House of Lords reform, the incorporation of European Convention of Human Rights into British law, Britain is now moving from a top- down centralized country to a devolved and more democratic state. With written constitutions introduced for Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, proportional representation in local assemblies and the Human Rights Act greatly empowering the judiciary and challenging the sovereignty of parliament, British constitutional reforms will be the most enduring political legacy of “Blairism” and look set to deepen in the next decade. The new British national identity Blair wanted to build, as analyzed by Driver and Martell (2002), mainly emphasized three aspects, namely, “patriots and populists in the ‘giving age,’ ‘creative Britain,’ and ‘the young country’” (p. 145-148). By “patriots and populists in the ‘giving age’,” Blair positioned the Labor Party as the “patriotic party” with a strong sense of history and tradition, as a “people’s party” (whose budget was named the “people’s budget”) serving public good and aimed to inspire a sense of community by 103 Intercultural Communication Studies XVII: 1 2008 Shi appealing to national pride underpinned by the collective values and institutions such as social justice and National Health Service. By “creative Britain,” Blair meant to tap the potential of the British nation as an inherently creative people for the historical inventions initiated in Britain. Lastly, “the young country” indicated the characteristics of being creative, inventive, dynamic, and forward-looking, which Blair wanted the country to be associated with in the age of globalization. In retrospect, New Labor has to great extent succeeded in inspiring the fairness, creativity and, modernity in British national identity. New Britain is a fairer society: Blair introduced a national minimum wage system to protect the basic interests of low-incomers and promoted reforms in social welfare and education, leading to considerable increases in the health service fund and education budget. New Britain is “creative Britain” in tune with the developments of a post-industrial information society, with its creative industry responsible for $157 billion out of $2.2 trillion of global revenues in 2000 (Howkins, 2002). Britain has displayed its particular strengths in creative work and innovations, whether in science or in the cultural industries, industries crucial to a service- and information-dominated post- industrial economy. Britain is leading the world in design, pharmaceuticals, financial services, and telecommunications (Driver & Martell, 2002, p. 147). Labor encouraged the hi-tech enterprises through tax cuts and invested more into education, especially equipping the schools with computers. The “young country” image boosted by the New Labor was an attempt to come to terms with modernity and to focus on contemporary culture and the industries of the post-industrial information society. Blair himself has been the first young Prime Minister to grow up in the 1960s. The Department of National Heritage under Thatcher government was changed under Labor into the Department for Culture, Media, and Sport. In appealing to the interests of the young, Labor designed their free entry to museums and art galleries. Greatly helped by innovations in digital technology, modern cultural industries in Britain were seen to have undergone rapid change and have played an important role in Britain’s long-term economic boom in the past decade. The fact that Spice Girls’ music could bring in more annual revenue to Britain than its entire iron and steel industry displayed both creativity and youthfulness of the country. Of course, everything has its two sides. Blair’s Britain image is felt to be too “London- based”, largely celebratory and too youth-tailored, “reducing national identity to a corporate brand” for sale (Parekh, 2000), which is a popular tendency for post-modern society. British Identity in Bidding for the 2012 Olympic Games To illustrate more vividly the image of Britain Blair has and Labor is still aiming for, I think the 2005 promotional film Make Britain Proud for bidding for the 2012 Olympic Games would serve as a good example, as Olympic bidding is based on the “model of national representation” (Polly, 2004, p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Political Affairs Brief a Daily Summary of Political Events Affecting the Jewish Community
    23 October 2009 Political Affairs Brief A daily summary of political events affecting the Jewish Community Scottish Council of Jewish Communities SCoJeC Contents Home Affairs Foreign Affairs Israel Relevant Legislation Consultations Home Affairs UK Parliamentary Question Tony Blair Faith Foundation Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what funding his Department has provided to the Tony Blair Faith Foundation; for which events run by the Foundation his Department has provided sponsorship; and if he will make a statement. [293764] Mr. Douglas Alexander: The Department for International Development (DFID) has not provided any funding directly to the Tony Blair Faith Foundation (TBFF). We have provided £30,000 to World Vision, who are co-sponsoring a seminar series with the TBFF focusing on the theme of faiths in development. Oxfam and Islamic Relief have also contributed funds to the series. These seminars are taking place at the Royal Society of Arts in London from 7 September to 12 November. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091022/text/91022w00 24.htm#09102248000057 UK Parliament Early Day Motion Mike Gapes (2145) BBC and the British National Party – That this House believes that the BBC are profoundly wrong to argue that just because the modern heirs of Hitler, the holocaust-denying racists of the BNP, have the support of six per cent. of the UK population they should be treated as a normal party and invited onto the main television political programme Question Time; notes that no previous BBC Director General made such a judgement and that neither Martin Webster, who polled 16 per cent.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit and Jersey
    BREXIT AND JERSEY Mark Boleat April 2016 Executive summary On June 23rd voters in the United Kingdom will decide whether the UK should remain a member of the European Union. The decision will be of massive importance to the UK, a “leave” vote being followed by years of uncertainty as Britain seeks to establish a new economic relationship not just with the European Union but also with the rest of the world. By extension, the vote will also be of crucial importance to Jersey, given that Jersey’s economy is closely tied to that of the UK and Jersey’s prosperity depends on it being semi- detached to the UK. When Britain decided to seek to join the then EEC in 1971 this was seen as potentially very damaging to Jersey, at the least resulting in increased competition for agricultural products, and at worst threatening the tourism and finance industries if Jersey were to be subject to the full rules of the EEC. In the event Jersey got the best possible deal - inside the common external tariff but outside the EEC generally. These arrangements were set out in Protocol 3 to the 1972 Accession Treaty. In practice, Jersey became loosely attached to the EEC as well as semi-detached to the UK. This was achieved through low- key way, but with good preparation in both Jersey and the UK. The Brexit debate in the UK is as much emotional as rational. Business is strongly in favour of Britain remaining in the EU but finds it difficult to engage in such a debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Case Studies in Self-Determination: the Rock and the Bailiwick
    Two Case Studies in Self-Determination: The Rock and the Bailiwick INGE V. PORTER* TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 340 II. SELF-DETERMINATION ....................................................................................... 342 A. History...................................................................................................... 342 B. General Scope and Content...................................................................... 345 1. Decolonization................................................................................... 345 2. Post-Decolonization.......................................................................... 349 3. Historic Title ...................................................................................... 350 4. Limits to the Principleof Self-Determination.................................... 354 C. M icrostates ............................................................................................... 356 D. Future Trends ........................................................................................... 357 1. The Demise of the Principle of Self-Determination?......................... 357 2. Self-Determination as Customary Law .............................................. 358 3. Self-Determination as a Right to a Democratic Form of Government ......................................................................... 360 III. THE CASE OF GIBRALTAR ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Empire and English Nationalismn
    Nations and Nationalism 12 (1), 2006, 1–13. r ASEN 2006 Empire and English nationalismn KRISHAN KUMAR Department of Sociology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA Empire and nation: foes or friends? It is more than pious tribute to the great scholar whom we commemorate today that makes me begin with Ernest Gellner. For Gellner’s influential thinking on nationalism, and specifically of its modernity, is central to the question I wish to consider, the relation between nation and empire, and between imperial and national identity. For Gellner, as for many other commentators, nation and empire were and are antithetical. The great empires of the past belonged to the species of the ‘agro-literate’ society, whose central fact is that ‘almost everything in it militates against the definition of political units in terms of cultural bound- aries’ (Gellner 1983: 11; see also Gellner 1998: 14–24). Power and culture go their separate ways. The political form of empire encloses a vastly differ- entiated and internally hierarchical society in which the cosmopolitan culture of the rulers differs sharply from the myriad local cultures of the subordinate strata. Modern empires, such as the Soviet empire, continue this pattern of disjuncture between the dominant culture of the elites and the national or ethnic cultures of the constituent parts. Nationalism, argues Gellner, closes the gap. It insists that the only legitimate political unit is one in which rulers and ruled share the same culture. Its ideal is one state, one culture. Or, to put it another way, its ideal is the national or the ‘nation-state’, since it conceives of the nation essentially in terms of a shared culture linking all members.
    [Show full text]
  • Radical Nostalgia, Progressive Patriotism and Labour's 'English Problem'
    Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour©s ©English problem© Article (Accepted Version) Robinson, Emily (2016) Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour's 'English problem'. Political Studies Review, 14 (3). pp. 378-387. ISSN 1478-9299 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/61679/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Author’s Post-Print Copy Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour's 'English problem' Emily Robinson, University of Sussex ABSTRACT ‘Progressive patriots’ have long argued that Englishness can form the basis of a transformative political project, whether based on an historic tradition of resistance to state power or an open and cosmopolitan identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Brace Yourselves – This Election Will See Even More Political Adverts. It Won't Be Pretty
    7/10/2019 Brace yourselves – this election will see even more political adverts. It won't be pretty Academic rigour, journalistic flair Subscribe Fourth estate follies Trawling through the dustbins of the UK media Brace yourselves – this election will see even more political adverts. It won’t be pretty February 23, 2015 6.20pm GMT Author John Jewell Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University Sometimes political advertising can backfire. Freakangels.com, CC BY-SA The extraordinary resignation of its chief political editor, Peter Oborne, from the Daily Telegraph has given us cause to think about the importance of corporate influence in journalism and the significance of advertising revenue to newspapers. As these events occurred, the paper’s Ben Riley-Smith was providing us with further proof, if any were needed, that advertising will play a major part in May’s general election. In a Telegraph article which asked whether Britain was entering an “new era” of political attack ads, Riley-Smith drew attention to the fact that the Conservatives had been posting a series of short videos (none of them lasting more than a minute) on YouTube concentrating on Ed Miliband’s supposed https://theconversation.com/brace-yourselves-this-election-will-see-even-more-political-adverts-it-wont-be-pretty-37934 1/5 7/10/2019 Brace yourselves – this election will see even more political adverts. It won't be pretty incompetence and the Labour party’s general untrustworthiness. One, posted on Feb 3, is a 16-second head rush called: “The SNP and Sinn Fein propping up Ed Miliband? Chaos for Britain”.
    [Show full text]
  • The British Labour Party and Zionism, 1917-1947 / by Fred Lennis Lepkin
    THE BRITISH LABOUR PARTY AND ZIONISM: 1917 - 1947 FRED LENNIS LEPKIN BA., University of British Columbia, 196 1 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of History @ Fred Lepkin 1986 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY July 1986 All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. Name : Fred Lennis Lepkin Degree: M. A. Title of thesis: The British Labour Party and Zionism, - Examining Committee: J. I. Little, Chairman Allan B. CudhgK&n, ior Supervisor . 5- - John Spagnolo, ~upervis&y6mmittee Willig Cleveland, Supepiso$y Committee -Lenard J. Cohen, External Examiner, Associate Professor, Political Science Dept.,' Simon Fraser University Date Approved: August 11, 1986 PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University the right to lend my thesis, project or extended essay (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Title of Thesis/Project/Extended Essay The British Labour Party and Zionism, 1917 - 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • 'The Left's Views on Israel: from the Establishment of the Jewish State To
    ‘The Left’s Views on Israel: From the establishment of the Jewish state to the intifada’ Thesis submitted by June Edmunds for PhD examination at the London School of Economics and Political Science 1 UMI Number: U615796 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615796 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 F 7377 POLITI 58^S8i ABSTRACT The British left has confronted a dilemma in forming its attitude towards Israel in the postwar period. The establishment of the Jewish state seemed to force people on the left to choose between competing nationalisms - Israeli, Arab and later, Palestinian. Over time, a number of key developments sharpened the dilemma. My central focus is the evolution of thinking about Israel and the Middle East in the British Labour Party. I examine four critical periods: the creation of Israel in 1948; the Suez war in 1956; the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 and the 1980s, covering mainly the Israeli invasion of Lebanon but also the intifada. In each case, entrenched attitudes were called into question and longer-term shifts were triggered in the aftermath.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo-Saxon and Scots Invaders
    Anglo-Saxon and Scots Invaders By around 410AD, the last of the Romans had left Britain to go back to Rome and England was left to look after itself for the first time in about 400 years. Emperor Honorius told the people to fight the Picts, Scots and Saxons who were attacking them, but the Brits were not good fighters. The Scots, who came from Ireland, invaded and took land in Scotland. The Scots split Scotland into 4 separate places that were named Dal Riata, Pictland, Strathclyde and Bernicia. The Picts (the people already living in Scotland) and the Scots were always trying to get into England. It was hard for the people in England to fight them off without help from the Romans. The Picts and Scots are said to have jumped over Hadrian’s Wall, killing everyone in their way. The British king found it hard to get his men to stop the Picts and Scots. He was worried they would take over in England because they were excellent fighters. Then he had an idea how he could keep the Picts and Scots out. He asked two brothers called Hengest and Horsa from Jutland to come and fight for him and keep England safe from the Picts and Scots. Hengest and Horsa did help to keep the Picts and Scots out, but they liked England and they wanted to stay. They knew that the people in England were not strong fighters so they would be easy to beat. Hengest and Horsa brought more men to fight for England and over time they won.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: DOUGLAS ALEXANDER MP SHADOW FOREIGN SECRETARY MAY 6 Th 2012
    PLEASE NOTE “THE ANDREW MARR SHOW” MUST BE CREDITED IF ANY PART OF THIS TRANSCRIPT IS USED THE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: DOUGLAS ALEXANDER MP SHADOW FOREIGN SECRETARY MAY 6 th 2012 ANDREW MARR: And now back to our own elections. Labour may have picked up more than 800 council seats and talk of replacing Ed Miliband as Leader before the next election may be suddenly going a bit quiet, but a share of the vote of 38 per cent is less than David Cameron enjoyed two years before the last General Election and that wasn’t enough to give him a majority at Westminster, so what must Labour now do to try to capitalise on this undoubted boost? Douglas Alexander is Shadow Foreign Secretary and one of Ed Miliband’s key strategists. So clearly a good result for Labour and some important results in Scotland which we’ll come onto in a moment. And yet you know again and again we’ve had mid-term local election results under Labour, under the Conservatives in the past, which haven’t followed through to General Elections, so what’s the strategy for what happens next? DOUGLAS ALEXANDER: Well let’s try and understand what we saw this week. I mean of course we saw real progress for Labour not just in the South of England but in the North of Scotland, but we have to accept that this was actually a damning verdict on the Conservatives as much as it was a judgement on the progress that Labour has made. This is a government that promised that they had a plan to get the economy moving, and now 1 we’ve seen a double dip recession, rising unemployment, flat-lining growth, a plan that just has failed.
    [Show full text]
  • Baker to Balls: Do Politicians Really Make a Difference?
    Caroline Benn Memorial Lecture 2010 Baker to Balls: Do Politicians really make a difference? Lecturer: Barry Sheerman INTRODUCTION This afternoon I want to engage with you in a way that is appropriate at an event where we remember our friend and comrade Caroline Benn. Caroline was a formidable woman who loved to engage in the cut and thrust of debate. Caroline Benn is probably most famous for her passionate campaign for a fully comprehensive education system in Britain but I remember her as much more than that. When she worked with me when I was a young shadow minister it was obvious that she thrived on the lively exchange of ideas and it was her passion for fairness founded on social justice and education as the foundation stone for a fair society that shone through. She didn’t campaign for comprehensives as a panacea. It is Caroline’s passion for debate, the conviction she held that education was the key to social justice and indeed the fond memories I have of her that I reflected on as I prepared my talk for today. In view of this I hope that my contribution will lead to a vigorous exchange, that takes the longer view of the education debate in this country. I am sure that were Caroline here she would have much to say in response to what I put forward today. It is a great sadness that she is not. But I hope that it might inform the development of future policy as education enters a very different and challenging phase.
    [Show full text]
  • Orme) Wilberforce (Albert) Raymond Blackburn (Alexander Bell
    Copyrights sought (Albert) Basil (Orme) Wilberforce (Albert) Raymond Blackburn (Alexander Bell) Filson Young (Alexander) Forbes Hendry (Alexander) Frederick Whyte (Alfred Hubert) Roy Fedden (Alfred) Alistair Cooke (Alfred) Guy Garrod (Alfred) James Hawkey (Archibald) Berkeley Milne (Archibald) David Stirling (Archibald) Havergal Downes-Shaw (Arthur) Berriedale Keith (Arthur) Beverley Baxter (Arthur) Cecil Tyrrell Beck (Arthur) Clive Morrison-Bell (Arthur) Hugh (Elsdale) Molson (Arthur) Mervyn Stockwood (Arthur) Paul Boissier, Harrow Heraldry Committee & Harrow School (Arthur) Trevor Dawson (Arwyn) Lynn Ungoed-Thomas (Basil Arthur) John Peto (Basil) Kingsley Martin (Basil) Kingsley Martin (Basil) Kingsley Martin & New Statesman (Borlasse Elward) Wyndham Childs (Cecil Frederick) Nevil Macready (Cecil George) Graham Hayman (Charles Edward) Howard Vincent (Charles Henry) Collins Baker (Charles) Alexander Harris (Charles) Cyril Clarke (Charles) Edgar Wood (Charles) Edward Troup (Charles) Frederick (Howard) Gough (Charles) Michael Duff (Charles) Philip Fothergill (Charles) Philip Fothergill, Liberal National Organisation, N-E Warwickshire Liberal Association & Rt Hon Charles Albert McCurdy (Charles) Vernon (Oldfield) Bartlett (Charles) Vernon (Oldfield) Bartlett & World Review of Reviews (Claude) Nigel (Byam) Davies (Claude) Nigel (Byam) Davies (Colin) Mark Patrick (Crwfurd) Wilfrid Griffin Eady (Cyril) Berkeley Ormerod (Cyril) Desmond Keeling (Cyril) George Toogood (Cyril) Kenneth Bird (David) Euan Wallace (Davies) Evan Bedford (Denis Duncan)
    [Show full text]