ABSTRACT
The well-known Right-Left differences on domestic and foreign policy are not reflected in the group’s business; indeed, a striking feature of the reports is the absence of substantive discussion of an economic or political nature, either on issues of concern to the union movement or to the Party. As the Leadership crisis grew in the late 1950s, however, the Parliamentary Party leaders as well as Brown and Pannell devised a legislative façade for the group. The passion for public ownership had been so spent that Pannell, speaking as group secretary in the House of Commons, could casually dismiss it as a present goal, and question whether the Party should have taken it up in the past, or should concern itself with it in the future. The vacuum of purpose within the Trade Union Group and, indirectly, the political vacuum in the sponsoring unions themselves, became apparent once more after the Leadership struggle abated.
