BRITISH PARLIAMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 7 March 1925, Page 3

BRITISH PARLIAMENT

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION 'l’ll I*: CO LOON E OCCUPATION*. LONDON, March 5. In the House ol Commons, Mr t'isiier a Liberal, opened a debate on foreign alfairs.

Jlo said that he hoped that .Mi- Chamberlain would lift the veil, that is at present spread over foreign policy, lie pointed out that tho postponement of the evacuation of Cologne was the very gravest step, and he pressed for the publication of the case against Germany on the subject of disarmament. Tho Liberals, lie said, were most anxious about the language that had been used by M. Herriot in the Trench press, suggesting that tho evacuation of Cologne was hound up in French minds with the general question of security. He asked would the Russian evacuation of Cologne he carried out independently of Trench concurrence, or must the Allies he agreed that the Treaty was being observed. Tho Liberals, said Mr Fisher, were unalterably opposed to the proposal for an Anglo-Frencli-llelgian Triple Alliance. A far more promising suggestion was contained in the reports that Germany had submitted a proposal for a pact guaranteeing the Freneli frontiers.

Mr Chamberlain replied that the Opposition was well aware of the caution and even reticence, with which he must speak. He hoped the House would not blame him if he reserved his opinion upon many subjects that were not ripe for decision. He said: “As regards Cologne, we have not even now got a considered appreciation of the points on which Germany lias defaulted lmt we knew, some time ago, that Germany was in default, and was not justided in claiming the evacuation of Cologne on January 10th. The policy of His Majesty's Government was directed to securing compliance with the substantial and necessary measures of disarmament, on which the Allies must insist, before they could modify the fifteen year period of occupation. LONDON. March 5. In the House of Commons, Mr Chamberlain (Foreign Secretary) emphasised that he did not desire to conceal anything, regarding the occupation and iGerman defaults. The Commission’s report provided for publication, but the question of publication depended upon the Allies’ concurrence; while he was not sure that publication, in the mass, of the small defaults without discrimination, was likely to conduce to the object in view. He nointed out that the occupation of Cologne cannot he continued, except in pursuance of the clear purpose of the provisions of the Treaty.

Adverting to the question of security, which he described as of “immense, overwhelming importance” Mr Chamber! nin declared that the dominant elempnt in Europe to-day was an idl-per-vading sense of insecurity. “No real progress” he said “can be made until we have relieved the oppressive fears haunting tllie winking and sleeping thoughts of the statesmen in many countries.”

Turning to Mr Fisher’s suggestion that Germanv has made proposals to tho Allies, Mr Chamberlain stated that Ids first knowledge of this was from communications which reached him a few weeks hack. He immediately said that tic could not receive sucji communications under an implied pledge that he was not to sneak to them or tho Allies. The Minister was constantly interrupted by Mr Kirkwood (Glasgow Labourite) who, at length, shouted:— “What about the Red Letter?” when

Mr Chamberlain was referring to a sedocument lie received from Germany. The Chairman of Committees threatened to suspend Mr Kirkwood, hut he did not refrain from interrupting. Mr Kirkwood then rose and shouted at the Chairman, who ordered him to leave the chamber. Mr Kirkwood refused and lie was then “named” and the Speaker was summoned. Mr Chamberlain then moved the sus-

pension of Mr Kirkwood, which was carried, after Mr MacDonald had uusuccessfully interceded. Mr Marl)unald contended that Mr Kirkwood had not been given his proper rights. The Speaker asked Mr Kirkwood to leave. Thereupon the Labourites rose in a body, and marched out, headed by Mr 'MacDonald amidst Ministerial laughter and cheers. Mr Chamberlain then resumed his speech. He said the fact that it was thought necessary to impose secrecy made* him' a little suspicious of the spirit in which the proposals were made, but the German Ambassador assured’him that Germany always intended to eoniinunic ite similarly with Paris, Brussels and Koine, and that had now been done. Mr Chamberlain said that lie welcomed the new move by the German Government, and now that they had substantially repeated their proposals to tin, other Allies, he attached great importance thereto. It was obviously not desirable, at this stage, to enter into public details. The Minister added that the exchange of views among the Allies up to the present had been of the slightest and a fuller exchange of views, with a closer examination of the purport and possibilities of the proposals, was necessary before anything could he usefully or safely added on the subject. NO INFORMATION'.

Mr Fisher asked whether the r.ewrpaer reports roughly represeiiLed the proposal. . Mr Chamberlain said he prelerred not to give any appreciation of sueli important proposals, which might 1 ossihlv he the point of the real recovery of the European situation. If Britain’s help were required to effect such a eonsummation, the help and also the goodwill of this country would not be lacking. Me had not yet formed an idea as to the form their co-operation should take. . „ , , , , j)• reierred to pas** forts to withdraw from Continental cnlamdements. He added : “Hut we aie living only 20 miles from the Continent. AVe cannot remain indiderent to the peace and security of the Continental world, nor can we remain callous nr deaf to an appeal for help. It >s not in any selfish short-sighted spirit of isolation that we shall exercise our mission and intluenc; in the world, now that we speak in consultation with the free-governing dominions.” mT Cluiinlierlain eoncluded : “Our greatness and power to help to remove from the minds of men the trouble which still haunts them and recalls the Mr agonies of a. few years ago, are great : nm l there is a call to endeavour, eliort and service on the part of the British Empire. I believe that the Empire w.il ""’“"'' "I.OXDOX, M.rrf. 6. Mr Chamberlain’s speech, given on the eve. of In's departure for Bans, i> being given prominence in the newspapers. His references to Germany are regarded as most important, llieie is. as yet. little editorial comment, hut the‘‘Morning Post,” referring to Inland .emphasised the point that. Be do not want to see a pact ui the Most followed hv a. partition in the hast. The Parliamentary correspondents points out that a definite outline of any Brtiish solution of the security problem, if existing there is one. is still not forthcoming. ~ . The “Daily Chronicle” says Britain Ims turned 'down two security schemes, and has thus assumed the responsibility for stating an alternative. _ LONDON. March o. The Labour Leader, Mr llnmsay MacDonald, is considered to have taken an unprecdeiited and dangerous step in leading the Labour Party out ot the House in open defiance of the Chairman of Committees. . ■ . Mr MacDonald’s excuse is that there would have been an uglv scene if he had not acted, as the Scottish Socialists, who are grouped around Mr Kirkwood, intended to prevent an elderly Sergea nt-at r Arms from removing Mr Kirkwood from the House, and d would have been necessary to call lithe police. . , „ Mr MacDonald probably avoided adisgraceful fi-eo fight by leading tio procession of the Labourites into the lobby.

I The general belief in the lobby is that the Chairman of Committees was somewhat precipitate in suspending Air Kirkwood whoso interjections were rude but were discounted by the fact that Air Kirkwood makes a practice of Hus sort of thing, and was apparently pulled up. Several Literals voted with Labour, including Sir John Simon, when the | division took place. When the tcsnll was announced, there were cries of “Cads!” “Scandalous!” 1 As the Labour!tes left, the. lory members broke their silence with a mocking laugh. . Ah- Jack Jones of Silver!own cried out: “Come outside! We will give you some more!” CENSURE OF CHAIRMAN. LONDON, .March •*>. The Labourites did not return to the House of Commons during the Inreign policy debate, hut they met, and resolved that, while deprecating persistent obstruction of business, there was no jurisdiction for the peremptory and arbitrary action of Air Hope (Chairman of Committees) in naming Air Kirkwood for slight interruptions, which were nowise provocative or disorderly. The Party Executive subsequeiily decided to a motion to the elfeet that Air Hope had after with undue haste and impatience, and that therefore the naming of Afr Kirkwood was unwarranted. Mr MacDonnld to-morrow will ask the Government for an opportunity to discuss the motion, which no doubt will be granted immediately.

FRONTIER question. LONDON. March fi. In the House of Commons. Sir Edward Grigg (Liberal) recalled the original pact with France. He said that, it had been ratified hv Australia and New Zealand, and it, was not ratified hv Canada or South Africa. He declared that that was a serious consideration. hilt a new form of guarantee would probably commend itself more to the dominions, while as regards South Africa, it must be remembered that Holland was at present as midi interested!- in a guarantee for her frontiers ns any power. Sir John Simon objected to security being linked up with the occupation, and he said that unless Germany had seriously violated the Treaty, wc were in Cologne without authority.

(Received this day at 9 a.m.)

Sir A. Morrison Hell (Conservative, Hoiiitou) urged tin Government to study jealously any agi cement that would put the British naval or other fortes in pawn. Mr Runcinian (Liberal, Swansea) pressed Mr Chamberlain to state his views on the protocol and expressed regret that Britain had tied her hands by undertaking to support the reappointment of the present Freneli chairman of the Saar Commission. Air Chttmberlnht in -winding up tlio debate denied that the Saar timid In described as the danger spot of Europe although lie was 1 repared to defend all that went on in the Saar administration.

Regarding the protocol, Air Chamberlain, said that after three months' deliberations they hail only just reached a stage where a statement eouln possibly be made. He was still uncertain in wlmt form the Government's decision would best be conveyed, but In expected to be called on to make an announcement at tho next League o! Nations meeting, lie was averse to encouraging flic signature ol international documents of fundamental importance with a. string of .separate discordant reservations by many signatory powers. It was sometimes net csss rv to sign with reservations, but it was dangerous to base a charter <> tlie world's peace on documents with reservations. All the indications lie was able to obtain about the state of public opinion in other countries, which had signed or contemplated signing the .protocol, led him to the conclusion that if Britain signed tomorrow without nnioiitTnient. we should not have to settle the question of security. Nevertheless, Mr Chamberlain emphasised tho British desire lor arbitration and disarmament. Apropos of tin 1 occupation .Mr Cliaiubeilain denied that we were surrendering the rights of private judgment by conferring with the Allies where it was better and more loyal to confer. “Suppose we,” said Mr Chamberlain, ‘•'walk- out of Cologne in order that somebody else, not the Germans, may walk in.’ Would that advance agreement with Germany or the better atmosphere which tho Liberals desiied. Here was a ease necessitating agreement but in default of an agreement Britain reserved- the right to take anv action she thought fit or expedient, in "accordance with tho circumstances.” Afr Chamberlain said lie was unable to state whether tho Allies would agree to a. meeting with Germany; but. speaking for himself, he wanted any course giving the best hope, not ol prolonging the contest, but of gettin*. satisfaction and bringing the occupation to an end.