BRITISH POLITICS

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 184, 2 May 1933, Page 9

BRITISH POLITICS

Dangers of Conservative Split MR. BALDWIN’S FEARS (By Telegraph.—Frees issn.—Copyright.) London, April 30. Mr. Stanley Baldwin, speaking at Bewdley, said that he regretted that Mr. Winston Churchill, Lord Lloyd, and their supporters refused to co-operate on the Indian Committee, and were, on the contrary, trying to spilt the Conservative Party. “I don’t believe they will succeed, he said, “but If they do it will only render the return of the Socialist Government easier.” Mr. Baldwin emphasised the necessity for the National Government, declaring that Britain was almost the only country in the world still steering the ship by popular Government safely. “I believe,” he said, “that If you get a feeble Government, and the parties for sane progress split, you might see a slide over similar to that in other countries/ taking the form either of Bolshevism or Fascism. I want neither in Britain.” MR. CHURCHILL REPLIES Indian Abdi cat i° n Policy (Received May 1, 8.30 p.m.) London, April 30. Replying to Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Winston Churchill says the whole burden of responsibility for splitting the Conservatives rests with the leader, who forces on the party a policy on which it was never consulted and which runs counter to its deepest instincts and traditions. The Government and Mr. Baldwin, he adds, fire resolved to force the Indian abdication policy through ab all costs. INDIA POLICY /

The Conservative Revolt .VIR CHURCHILL’S OUTBURST (Reuter—Special to “The Dominion.”) London, March 27. The Conservative back bench revolt against the Government's India policy has now taken definite shape as the result of a meeting held the other evening. About sixty Conservative M.P.’s attended, and decided to form an India De.fence Committee to oppose ‘‘the abdication of central government of India, and to take any measures to resist this proposal, for which there is no mandate either in Britain or India.” Membership of the commitfee is limited to those who are prepared to vote against the Government when the Indian proposals come before the House. Sir Alfred Knox, who has been elected chairman of the committee, has long been one of the keenest critics of the Government’s policy. Mr. Winston Churchill was among those who attended the meeting. and it goes without saying that his will be the most eloquent voice among the critics. ' According to the promoters of the movement more than sixty M.P.’s have already pledged themselves to oppose, the Government on this issue, and if this is so. they appear to have secured about thirty new recruits in recent months. They are hoping to muster well over a hundred. Whatever 'the strength of the revolt, there can he no doubt that it is the most formidable the Government has bad to ■face in the present Parliament, and the Ministerial whips are said to be moving heaven and earth to circumvent it. Conservative “Die-Hards.” A large proportion of the “rebels” belong to the old Conservative "Diet.-lard” group, which has opposed the idea of Indian self-government from its inception. but on this occasion a number of more moderate M.P.’s have joined in opposing the constitution of an AU-India Federal Government at the present time. They are not necessarily opposed to a further instalment of self-government, but they feel that the time has not yet arrived when such a complete system, as the Government propose can be safely adopted, either in the interests of this country or of Indians themselves. As one of the "rebel” M.P.’s remarked: “I have always been a loyal supporter of the National Government, but if T. am forced to choose between losing India and the National Government, then. I say. let us keep India.” Mr. Churchill's Outburst. A few days after the meeting Mr. Winston Churchill forcefully criticised the Government's India policy, ami followed it up by a bitter condemnation of the Prime Minister’s foreign policy, coupled with a personal attack on Mr. MacDonald himself. '! he occasion of this fresh broadside was ; the debate on the Premier’s visit to Geneva and Home, during which Mr. MacDonald gave an account of his efforts to save the Disarmament Conference and of his meeting with Signor Mussolini. The Prime .Minister dealt with the Mussolini plan in broad outline, for the very good reason that it has nof sufficiently advanced •to discuss detail. Clarity of expression is not one of his strongest qualities, however, and a good deal of his speech, was almost incomprehensibly vague. Mr. Churchill seized on this to describe the Primo Minister ns the man who excelled in the art of compressing the greatest number of words into the smallest amount of thought. Ho followed this up with the sweeping charge that Mr. MacDonald's conduct of foreign policy had brought us nearer war and had made us weaker, poorer and more defenceless — a statement which aroused great resentment. among Ministerialists. Finally. Mr. f'burchill brought a streak of clever and biting jibes to an cud by advising the Prime Minister to give up his interventions into foreign affairs, to devote himself to the urges! domestic tasks jiwaiting him at. home, and to leave foreign affairs to be conducted through the normal diplomatic channels by competent Ambassadors who knew their job. Il is a long time since the House has been treated to such'a display of biting invective, but Mr. Churchill soon found he had stirred up a hornet’s nest. Ministerialists paid him hack in his own coin, roundly condemning his utterances as the poisonous and mischievous diatribe of a disappointed office-seeker. The resentment at his attack on the Prime Minister was even shared by some Labour speakers—a rather surprising feature, since the Opposition have no love for Mr. MacDonald in these days. Baltic Postponed. The battle between the Conservative “rebels” and the Government over the Tnd'a policy which was to have taken place in the debate on the motion setting up a Joint Select Committee of both Houses of Parliament to examine the Governmerit’s proposals, has been postponed, just at the moment when the rebels were priming their guns in readiness, the terms of the motion were announced and the malcontents found themselves with no target to fire at for the time being. T'nappeased by the Government s proposals, ns set out in the White I’aper recently issued, the India Defence (outmittee. set tip by the. "rebels,” had been organising opposition to the appointment

of the Joint Select Committee as being the appropriate occasion for voting against the Government. To their surprise, however, they found that the motion proposed that “before Parliament is asked to take a decision on the proposals contained in the White Paper the Joint Select Committee should bp set up to consider the future of India, and in particular . . . the proposals in the White I’n per.” This specific declaration that the appointment of the Select. Committee in no way commits Parliament to any approval of the White I’aper, and the proviso that the committee’s purview should cover the ■‘future of India,” as well as the Government's actual proposals, rather cut. the ground from under the rebels’ feet po far us voting against the Government in tho immediate future is concerned. Ncvmheless. (hey are claiming the terms of the motion as a sudden change of Government policy which they attribute to their agitation, and though they recognise that the appointment of the Select Committee wit] not provide an appropriate occasion for a test of strength, they are emphatically proclaiming that the battle has only been delayed by an astute move on the Government's part and that they will fight the “abdieation of British Government at the centre ’ in India, to the bitter mid when a vote is eventually taken on the policy itsell. The Government's step to get the Select. Committee appointed without, thereby committing Parliament Io any approval of the White Paper, coupled with tlie apparent widening of the committees term of reference, is variously interpreted in other quarters on the one hand as n concession to the rebels and on the other ns a straCe-ie move to delay any vote on policy until members have had more time to study the proposals in the White Paper. The Conservative Defence Committee ridieuies the safeguards ns being of no value, since, they argue, once Central Government has been handed over to Indians. whatever safeguards are provided will be ignored.