CRITICISM OF BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 145, 16 March 1934, Page 11

CRITICISM OF BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

“Hesitant Leadership” DEBATE IN HOUSE OF COMMONS By Telegraph.—Press Aasn.—Copyright. (Received March 15, 7.30 p.m.) London, March 15. In the House of Commons, Mr. Morgan Jones (Lab.), moving the rejection of the Foreign Office Vote, attributed the recent revived war talk in Europe to the British Government’s hesitant leadership. Herr Hitler came into power largely owing to the League’s failure, he said. Britain failed to respond to the United States and Italian proposals, or to take advantage of the French Left Wing Government’s search for security through the League, leading Germany to favour breaking the chains of 'he Versailles Treaty. Mr. Winston Churchill said that it was impossible to expect France to reduce her army to the strength of Poland. Germany, and Italy, particularly in times like the present. "We are deluding ourselves if we imagine, because we increased our air force, that France will consent to reduce hers,” he said. "The Disarmament Conference brought us nearer a pronounced state of European ill-will than anything else, and resulted only in Hie rearmament of Germany.” Colonel Wedgewood (Lab.) said that Mr. Eden’s speech (which is re-

ported in the preceding column) was out of date. The rearmament of Germany had completely changed the situation. The Continental Powers did not know Britain’s policy. Locarno gave security '.o one frontier, and its extension ■ was vitally necessary. Sir Herbert Samuel (L.) drew attention to the cost of armaments which would preclude all hope of -e--ductiqjjs of" taxation and improved social conditions. The revival of German militarism was a tragedy >n which all might be doomed to take a lamentable part. Major Atlee (Lab.) said that Labour believed in a pooled security under the League, but this was unobtainable unless the members felt the obligations would be fulfilled.

Sir John Simon. Foreign Minister, in replying, said : “Our opponents must face the aluynative that if the disarmament efforts break down there will be a scramble in unchecked worldwide rearmament. It is a hundred times better to have a bad agreement than none at all.”

Mr? Morgan Jones’s amendment was negatived without division, and the Foreign Office Vote carried.