INTERESTING DEBATE

Hokitika Guardian, 3 May 1929, Page 5

INTERESTING DEBATE

INT HOUSE OF LORDS

ON BALFOUR, NOTE.

(British Official Wireless.)

(Received this dnv at 11 a.m.) RUGBY, May 2.

In the House of Lords, Lord Birkenhead (Conservative) called attention to the subject of war debts. He said he had reached the conclusion that measures which were related to liis motion, required very earnest consideration '.from the British iParliamten;t, and from parliamentary assemblies in other countries. In the Balfour memorandum which was acclaimed as a masterly State document by every Liberal and Conservative member of the .Coalition /Cabinet, a. gesture made for the cancellation of tfor ■debts. It was said a.s a resultof the war that two thousand millions were owing to us -from our late Allies, while mir debt to United States roughly was -nine hundred million. Those figures required very considerable revision. When one talked of two thousand million, it must be remembered that one-third of that- sum was owing to us from Russia. That nation had repudiated completely that debt. Defending Mi‘ Churchill s conductof financial negotiations with France and Italy, Lord .Birkenhead declared Mr Churchill bad made the best terms conceivably obtainable. It was -the oVoct of all of us to make a generous debt settlement, and at the same time the measure of the concessions which wo could make was limited by reasonable- economic and financial resouices of the nations with whom w c were dealing.

France bad emerged From many difficulties which had pressed upon her when our negotiations with her reached a decisive stage and it might be 'that were such negotiations to he resumed to-day. some slightly better terms might have been obtained. Take the case of Italy. She was a country which though politically of the greatest- possible consequence m Enrone, was one which economically was not rich, .and there were .well understood limits recognised h.v all authorities on international finance to the contributions which Ttaly could make. No one who dispassionately considered the position of Italy could have thought it proper to have asked more of Italy than we did ask. Lord Birkenhead agreed that we paid and were paying United States on a scale which the late Mr Bonnr Law had hardly exaggerated in describing as a scale which would affect our standard of living for a geneiatioiu but. we had some compensations. There was hardly anyone who believed in the year 1918 that British finixtire could retain for London the control of the finance of the world. Never could that result have been attained unless the golden indispensable asset of British credit, had been retained. . , nL . If a settlement, with United States had not taken place, our national sup. remucy would have passed elsewhere. Broken as we had been by the wir, we were still to-day the financial con. tre 'of the world.' We should take great and high hope from that circumstance. ft , Let them consider how far tlie Haifa ur memorandum contributed to it. It made a two-fold contribution. One was 'material, and the more important was moral. We said to the whole world just as a business proposition, if our creditors would forgive us our debts, though those who owed us money were far more numerous than those' to whom wc owed money, we would wipe out the whole account. A more generous offer had never been made by any country in the history of the world. Lord Birkenhead referred to the attack recently made upon the Ba - four -memorandum by Air -Snowden, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Labour Government. He also referred to the terms of the amendment to his motion, which was to ie proposed by Lord Parmoor, on behalf of the Labour Party. Lie noted Lord Partnoor’s amendment approved of the principle of the Balfour memorandum, while regretting the settlement made by the Conservative Government imposed unfair burdens upon British taxpayers. Ho asked Lord Parmoor to say it was not the purpose of (the 'Labour Party tlqf attempt to impair the authority of the Balfour memorandum upon which depended every financial arrangement which had since been made in Europe. To repudiate the memorandum would inflict a grievous, irreparable wound noon the refutation of this country. Ho himself had a deep responsibility for the memorandum. Ho was n member of the Cabinet which adopted it and he would regard the time when 'bis momentous financial decision wn« taken as one of the supreme moments of li is public life Lord Parmoor in moving an nmeiuluien. said the Labour Party had consistently /adopted and 'followed what it 'regarded as the leading princi 1 1* of* the Balfour note. Lord Birkenhead asked Lord Parmoor if lie associated himself with ilio Jnithot by Mr Snowden to tbo Balfour note.

Lord Parmoor replied quite frankly that he did not like it.. T.ord Parmoor proceeded to criticise certain aspects of the debt settlements The Marquis of Salisbury congratulated Lord Pnrrnoor upon having dissociated himself with the word “re pudiation” and the word ''infamous, which figured in Mr Snowden’s ob servntions on the Balfour note.

Lord Parmoor’s amendment, was rej (Miled by 89 votes to (>, and Lord nirkenhead’s motion was agreed to