DAVID Barlow's partisan critique (You Say, Wednesday, October 8) on Sir Winston Churchill's post war views on a united Europe cannot be left unchallenged.

It is correct that Churchill, in opposition, effectively adopted a federalist stance towards Europe and intended that Britain would play a major part.

However, even by 1950, he was retreating from that position and in the summer of that year told the House of Commons: "In our European Movement we have worked with federalists and we have always made it clear that, although they are moving along the same road, we are not committed to their conclusions".

By the time Churchill came back to power in late 1951, as Prime Minister, he was not in favour of joining a supra-national Europe. Understandably, in that early post-war period, Britain being part of Europe was not as important as the British Empire, the Commonwealth or indeed the special relationship with the USA.

Therefore while it is reasonable to credit Churchill as the originator of the idea of a federalist Europe, by 1950 he did not envisage Britain as being part of it.

By the early 1950s committed Europeans were embarked on a course that led to the 1957 Treaty of Rome (via the European Coal and Steel Community). Churchill was not interested in this.

It is regrettable that selective interpretation of history by politicians today to further their own cause, whatever their political affiliations, brings discredit on them and generates cynicism in the electorate.

J STUART PHILLIPS-BROADHURST

Broadwas, Worcestershire.