HOME POLITICS..

Hokitika Guardian, 15 February 1923, Page 2

HOME POLITICS..

IMPORTANT debate

AUSTRALIAN’ AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION,

LONDON, February 13. A In the House of Collisions, Mr uel Roberts, moving the address in' reply, said that foreign affairs occupied the foremost place, and their hearts went out to France, even if they were unable to follow her with their heads. Mr Hughes, in seconding the address, urged that British friendship , f°r France should Le more sedulously couraged and if possible, made fii

or. Air Ramsay MacDonald said that so tremendous was the problem of unemployment that he appealed to all sides of the house to try and grapple witl% the question without passion or prejudice. The pi esc lit condition of Europe lie said, was entirely due to the spirit which had animated the victors in the drawing up of the various peace treaties. They had framed them in the spirit of Imperialism and of annexation. Regarding the Ruhr, lie said: Our present attitude of benevolent neutrality is a dangerous one, tending > to develop into an attitude of taking sides. Fiance’s idea ol military security is a pure mirage. The only security Ties in the real functioning of the League of Nations. Referring to the Lausanne conference Mr MacDonald said lie thought the Allies should take Russia more into account, and should have treated the Turks with a little

more sympathy. .Mr Asquith stated he did not think the King's speech was a very promiii-v. ing prologue to an era of Parliamentary tranquility. The question of the Reparations still dominated and overshadowed the civilised world. He believed that the vast majority of people in this country, however, were sympathetic to France, and were distrustful uf Germany, and that they approved of the Government's decision not to participate in the Ruhr 'adventure. France could not possibly choose a worse method of ensuring military sc- x enrity than of appropriating even for a short time a province that might become a second Alsace-Lorraine. This country should not bo content with neutrality, hut it ought to press firmly mi both France and Germany the urgent necessity of allowing the League of Nations to deal with the matter. Mr Bonar Law said he still had great hopes that the Turks would sign the Allied treaty. He said:—We do not. want war. If war is irrevocable it will have to take place. It Is possible that the Turks are counting upon our war weariness! The French feeling of in- - J security was at the bottom of the rejection of their proposals made at the last Paris Conference. Turning to the Ruhr lie detailed the alternative proposals which Britain had submitted to Franc*. Ho said these were not even considered as forming a basis. of discussion. M. Poincare made it plain , that lie considered that two conditions were essential—first, the occupation of the Ruhr; and secondly he did not wish the total amount of the Reparations to he altered Britain had suggested £2,500,000,000 as the maximum which Germany could pay. The French seem ed to have a feeling that they would like to obtain the Reparations, but they did not wish to see Germany strong enough to pay. They were afraid that if a lower sum were fixed, Germany would pay off, and would in 20 or 30 years he as strong again as she was before the war. Air Bonar Law said ho thought the British proposals to France were not only just, hut generous. “H the British als were accepted,” lie said “the French and Italian debts to us would have disappeared hut it, became cleared that France was determined to try her plan.” He could, of course, have said to France. “This is the end of the Entente,” but lie thought it would he wise to take that course. He felt certain, however that in taking the step France did. she was doing something which would he disastrous, not only to Germany, hut to France. Ho sa id :—French opinion will not accept the situation until the occupation of the Ruhr has been tried. Well the French have tried it. I had hoped that we would have been able to carry out the reconstruction of Europe side by side with France, but the occupation of the Ruhr has proved disastrous to the economic life of Europe, as I feared would happen. The Ruhr is the jugular vein of the European industrial life. I do not know whether it will lie possible for the British troops to remain long on the Rhine. In fact, the present situation of difficulty might easily become acute. Either France or Germany could make it impossible for British troops to remain on the Rhine which would be a misfortune. He did not think any good could come at present from Mr Asquith’s suggestion to refer the matter to the League of Nations, because he was certain that France would have nothing to do with it. The Premier concluded by saying |,e still thought that Britain would lose by a rupture of the Entente. Mr Tom Shaw made an impassioned attack upon the French occupation of the Ruhr, particularly the use of the black troops there. He said that France was perpetrating a crime as great as anything in connection with AlsaceLorraine in 1871. She was following a deliberate policy to dismember the German Empire.

Mr Wheatley (Glasgow Labourite) defending hunger-strikers, said that they were the victims of capitalistic society. He wished that the hungerstrikers would blow up the town. All British history showed that if people made themselves sufficiently unpopular they would get wliat they wanted. Tho a Ministerialists, he said were more interested in consuming champagne than in studying social problems. The debate was adjourned.

IN THE LORDS. LONDON. February 14. _ The House of Lords has voted the l Address-in-Replv. In the House of Lords debate, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York listened to the debate. They were sitting in the front rrosshencli, "*h Lord —_ Staiiifordliam. After Lord Willoughby de Broke had moved and Lord Hastings had seconded the Address. Lord Grey said that unemployment was a very serious question at ["he present time. The condition ol

tho country would never bo really sound •frith the amount of unemployment existing. Tho situation abroad was exceedingly dark. Turkey could not have better terms. Neither France nor Britain mould be safe if divided. Personally he did not differ from the Government regarding the French action in the Ruhr. The French action was not merely unwise, but would be disastrous. The only solution was for the League of Nations to deal with the reparations as an economic question, and arrange to set. Germany on her feet in order that she might he able to pay. It was important to make Britain’s meaning clear. If Frame had not paid the German indemnity in 1871, did any one believe that Germany would have acted otherwise than France was d/iing to-day? Nevertheless France’s nation was disastrous from the point of view of getting cash. Lord Cnr/.on promised that a Lausanne blue book would he publish', d shortly. He said the terms offered Turkey were lavish in their generosity. France had to cope with the spirit of sullen resistance of Germany. Seme thing like a trench warfare had been reestablished. The fate of Kurope was beiAg worked out. The balance of the argument was decidedly in favour of British remaining on tile Ilhine. The League of Nations could not successfully interevon at present between France and Germany, hut the intervention of America, or the admission of Germany into the League, might oil'll a solution.

I'HESS VIEW. LONDON. Fe hr nary I I

The “Morning Rost” in a leading article entitled “Have we a foreign poley/” says: - Regarding the Ruhr, there has been a- diversity as to method but we are glad to gather from the Ring’s Speech that there is no enstrangement of feeling. If, upon all questions, we cannot act together,, we can at least remember Jkat no point of difference is important enough to be allowed to risk a. general quarrel. If we cannot net with France in the question of the Ruhr, lot us at least, remain faithful to the obligations of friendship. The deniiuiiciations of France by a section of the British press are disloyal to this friendship. .Moreover they are foolish! • Franco follows a well-considered policy i'll all things. Her statesmen arc reputed logical and clear headed. We must maintain friendship with France for security. Britain can only retain her friendship by treating her with fairness, loyalty, and consideration.

LABOR AMEND.M F..NT. LONDON, Fib 111.

Mr J. R. dynes, on behalf of the Labourites moves an amendment to tlie Addrciss-in-Roplv as follows:—“That, recognising the grave and dangerous condition of Europe and tbo Near East, will he a, certain source of future wars and serious aggravation of unemployment .the House regrets the absence of a policy which would < berk the progressive economic ruin of Europe; that the House contemplates an all-round cancellation of war debts as an essential part of a. workable general settlement and employment.” The amend-; input urges that the League of Nations 1 ho invoked in settling critical matters ! like the Ruhr; and urges also the early reconsideration of the peace treaties, especially their economic clauses. LIBERAL AMENDMENT.

The National Liberals’ amendment suggests that the Council of the League of Nations shouhl appoint a Commission of experts to report upon the capacity of Gonnany to pay the reparations ; on the host method of making payments, and that, in view of the United States’ offer to participate in a conference, the League should invite American experts to servo on the Commission. FURTHER. LABOUR AMENDMENT. (Received this dav at 0.30 a.m.) LONDON, i'eli it. Mr Adamson moves a further Labour amendment to the Address-in-Rcply demanding the appointment of a select committee to empiiro into the unsympathetic administration, of the War Pension Act, with a view to securing a full discharge of the solemn obligations to ex-sarvice men and their dopendants.