8-97
171
International Situation HOUSE OF COMMONS
[Mr. Stanley.]
by the right hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair) earlier this afternoon. Not only were those speeches eloquent and sincere but the manner in which they were received in all quarters of the House will, perhaps more even than the speeches, bring con- solation to those who are left. It is always a satisfaction to realise that one whom one has known intimately has in a wider circle made exactly the same impression as he made on those who were nearest and dearest to him, and it will be a great consolation to us to know that his simplicity of character and his kindliness of nature were as much valued in the wide circles of this House and in public life generally as they were in the circle of the family.
We have during the course of to-day's Debate covered a very wide field. We have gone from Spain to China, from China to Italy, and from Italy to Czecho- slovakia. We have discussed not only foreign policy but rearmament and air- raid precautions. We have had the Prime Minister's smile criticised by an hon. Member for one of the divisions of Leeds and we have had references to speeches made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour a year or two ago. It would need a Foreign Secretary, a Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence and a hypothetical Minister for Supply all rolled into one to reply adequately to all the questions raised in the course of the Debate. I want to confine myself to one of the points dealt with by the last speaker and to a point which is more appropriate to my Department, and that is the economic consequence of the poli- tical and social consequences which have been discussed at great length.
Before I come to that matter, it is only courteous that I should reply to one or two points which have been raised in the Debate. First, may I reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposi- tion, who put a question as to the posi- tion of the Anglo-American Treaty? There was a Question on the Order Paper to-day to which I should have given an oral answer, but it was not asked. I will read the answer, which will appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow:
Since the summer, when agreement was reached over a large part of the field, the negotiations have been concentrated limited list of items some of which have
01 a
International Situation
172
has
proved intractable. Our delegation recently defined the United Kingdom position on these outstanding matters, and we expect a reply from the United States very shortly.” There is only one thing I can say in implementation. Ever since I went to my present office I have had constantly in my mind as one of the most important of my tasks a new Anglo-American Treaty, and I should welcome it very heartily. On the other hand, I realise, as I think hon. Members in all parts of the House will realise, that if a treaty of this kind is to have anything but fleeting benefits, it must be a treaty which is fair to both sides. We know the position of our trade balance with America to-day. I am not sure that the existence of such a large discrepancy is not even now a threat not only to the trading stability of this country but through that to the trading stability of the world as a whole, and hon. Members will, I am sure, realise that how- ever desirable a treaty is, a treaty which would increase that disparity could not lead to any genuine appeasement or economic advantage to either side, but in the long run only lead to a loss. While I am as anxious as ever to obtain an Anglo-American Treaty, it must be a treaty fair to both sides, giving advan- tages to both and being biased towards neither.
see
new
I must warn the right hon. Gentleman opposite that if he shares my anxiety to an Anglo-American trade treaty brought about, he will have to speak to his hon. Friends because when the hon. Member opposite says that the technique which has to be adopted to cope with the new circumstances, is to include the exclusion from this country of goods which he says we do not want-by which I believe he means the placing from time to time of an embargo on cer- tain articles of luxury or of non-necessity then we must not embark on any policy of a trade agreement of this kind which would make it impossible to put into effect this new technique during the period of the treaty. The right hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland made an eloquent speech which he pre- faced by saying that he wanted to do as little as possible to destroy the unity in the
The country.
thought passed through my mind as to what would hap- the right hon. Gentleman pen when chose not to do as little but as much as possible.
173
International Situation
1 NOVEMBER 1938 International Situation
One or two other thoughts occurred to me during the course of his speech. He referred to the time when the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden) left the Government as the end of what he gave the impression was the golden age of unity in foreign policy, which the departure of the right hon. Gentleman destroyed. When I look at the attacks which the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington had to suffer in this House, the votes of censure which were moved upon him almost day by day, and the eloquence of the right hon. Mem- ber for Caithness and Sutherland, I find that by merely substituting the word Spain" for Czechoslovakia and the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington for the Prime Minister, they are almost word for word the speech which he made to-day. I could not but feel that people seem to take on a very rosy hue as soon as they leave the bench from which I am speaking.
""
There are one or two of the right hon. Gentleman's points with which I would like to deal. I will not refer to the matters he raised with regard to the Anglo- Italian Agreement, for clearly they are matter for discussion to-morrow, nor with some of the questions he asked concerning Defence which, as the Prime Minister said, will be discussed on a later occasion. However, the right hon. Gentleman asked a question about the position of those people now in concentration camps who might wish to make use of the article re- garding option in the Munich Agreement, I think the Prime Minister pointed out that the difficulty of the means of the exercise of that article is at present under discussion between the German and Czech Commissioners, and that in due course no doubt the result of their discussion will come before the full conference. Until the terms are settled, it is impossible to say what the exact power of option will be.
Sir A. Sinclair: This is a very important matter.
The difficulty I foresee is that the Czech representative may not be very greatly interested in the fate of the Ger- mans who may wish to opt out of the Reich. Could there not be an instruction to our Ambassador, when the matter is referred back to the International Com- mission, to take great care that the rights of these Germans who may be in concen- tration camps are safeguarded?
174
Mr. Stanley: Certainly, we will bear that in mind. The right hon. Gentleman then asked a question about the position in China and the giving of assistance from this country. The right hon. Gen- tleman will recollect that there was an announcement in the House, I think on 14th July, that the Government had not seen their way to introduce the special legislation which would be necessary in order to grant a loan to China. That does not mean, however, that the Government have been neglectful of the undertakings given at Geneva to consider what support States might individually extend to China, and in this connection they have expressed their willingness to assist, as far as lies in their power, in any scheme which might be put forward. Certain proceed- ings of this kind have been proposed, and they are at present under examination or on the way to fruition; but I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that it is not desirable that the details of these proposals and the circumstances nected with these matters should be gone into here at the present time.
con-
We also heard a very interesting speech from my hon. Friend the Member for East Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby) who, as recently pointed out, certainly does possess a golden tongue with which he appears to exercise complete control over the electors in Aberdeen. His speech, which covered a good deal of ground, most of which will be more directly connected with the De- bate upon armaments when it comes next week, raised some extremely interesting points. I am always interested in the hon. Gentleman's views on finance and economics, because although I do not always agree that they are right, they are always original and courageous. I must say that I did feel a little difficulty in going all the way with him on what he called the financial aspect of rearmament.
I cannot, I am afraid, agree that re- armament, even to the extent to which we have embarked on it at the moment, and still less an accelerated and increased armament in the future, is the one and only way to prosperity for this country. I am perfectly prepared to recommend not only the armaments which we are now making, but increased provision in the future as a necessary sacrifice which this people has to make for its security, but am not going to celebrate it as a good way of making the economy of this
98