HOUSE OF LORDS

Hokitika Guardian, 13 December 1929, Page 3

HOUSE OF LORDS

DISCUSSES EGYPT,

INT (CRESTING R EFER ENCES MADE. (British Official Wireless). (.Received this day at 10 a.m.) RUGBY, Dec. 11, The Government’s policy regarding Egypt was debated in the House of Lords this evening on the motion of Lord Salisbury, regretting the precipitation with which the policy was entered upon and the risk it entailed to the security of Imperial communications. The British policy in Egypt had retrieved that country from bankruptcy -and had restored order and prosperity. The Sudan had been rescued from a hopeless relapse into barbarism. Within a month of coming into office the present Government had in appearance at least, made a radical change in the policy hitherto adopted.

Lord Lloyd, formerly High Commissioner in Egypt, suggested that the draft treaty involved grave and serious changes in the policy. He criticised the military aspects of the draft treaty, particularly the provision whereby British troops were to be moved out of Cairo and Alexandria to the desert. Hie. was confident) the only place from which the canal could he economically and adequately defended was from Cairo or a place within striking distance of it. British troops had for some years ceased to be an army of occupation, but they wore a guarantee of safety. He criticised the removal of effective (European control of the police force and the withdrawal of British judges in the courts of justice.

Lord Parmoor, replying on behalf of the Government, said the return of Egyptian troops to Sudan had the fuill approval [of tbe Governor-Gen-eral. Sir John Maffey. Tt was the intention and desire of the Govern-, •inent to make no allteration whatever in the Sudan settlement. As long as we maintain our occupation of troops at Cairo, continued Lord Par moor, so long will it be impossible to make any advance in giving Egypt the independence she desires. We want to find a system which at the

same time wi|ll (establish the independence of Egypt and include the separate interests of Great Britain. The Government was going to preserve the (policy indicated in Lord Milner’s repdrt as long as they were in pow'er. They were determined to meet as fairly and large heartedly as possible the vital points on which Egyptians debated in order that they might have, in Lord Milner’s words, real national independence. He was instructed that unless provision was made for the removal of occupation of British troops at Cairo, of course at the same time having alternative occupation which gave added security for all interests included, no further progress could be made. Dealing with the doubts expressed regarding Egypt signing the Optional On use, Lord Plarmoor said tlvq draft treaty could not be signed by Egypt until she had become a member of the League of Nations and when she became a member the text, and reservations of the treaty would have to bo considered. The views adhered to by the Government were those starting from the report by Lord Milner’s commission. The substance of Lord Milner’s report had been adhered to. He did not believe it possible to follow the policy flmt Lord Llovd suggested. Earl Grey (Liberal) said the policy Lord Lloyd was advancing was entirely inconsistent with the declarator! of 1922. It was a most unfair and impracticable policy to go back to anything like the Cromer regime in Egypt. Lord Salisbury’s motion was carried. LONDON, December 11. In his speech in the House of Lords, Lord Lloyd said, “So far from stifling the Egyptians, it was Britain who had created and fathered their sense of nationality, and who granted them their independence in 1922. Their independence was only qualified bv the British Empire and the well being of the Egyptians themselves.” He said that the safety of the Suez Canal was •so vital to the Empire that not the least risk could be taken regarding it. The Government was proposing to station British soldiers in the bleak desert, where it would take 20 years of spending to render the area reasonably fit for a permanent garrison. How were they going to help if any grave disorders arose in the cities. He said , that Communists were sure to~see in the impending changes an opportunity

for repeating what they have done in China and Palestine. The galleries were crowded for the debate, to which Mr Baldwin and Mr Leopold Amery, and other ex-M,misters listened from near the Throne. The motion hv Lord Salisbury, “regretting the precipitancy, cjlf the Government’s new policy, and the risk it entailed to the security of communications,” was carried by 4G to 13.