OPPOSITION VIEWS OF SPEECH

Dominion, Volume 32, Issue 170, 15 April 1939, Page 11

OPPOSITION VIEWS OF SPEECH

New Responsibilities Welcomed GRAVE DANGERS TO BE FACED (British Official Wireless.) (Received April 14, 6.30 p.m.) RUGBY, April 13. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. C. R. Attlee, who followed the Prime Minister in the debate in the House of Commons, expressed disappointment that Mr. Chamberlain had not more closely dissociated himself from his former policy of trusting the dictators, which had been proved mistaken. Mr. Attlee thought that the rape of Albania was to the AngloItalian Agreement what, the destruction of Czechoslovakia was to the Munich declaration.

It was not clear that the Prime Minister did not intend to continue to follow what had been a. disastrous policy. At this point Mr. Chamberlain interrupted Mr. Attlee and when the latter repeated, “I thought the Premier said he intended to pursue the policy he had introduced,” he said, “What I said was that I thought it right at the time. I did not say that the changes which have taken place would render it right to continue the same policy.” Continuing, Mr. Attlee said he welcomed the fact that the British Government had undertaken these responsibilities toward Poland, Greece, and Rumania, but he pointed out that in so doing It was necessarily facing grave dangers. He argued that what the Government had done was at last to undertake obligations which it had refused to accept under the League Covenant at a time when it would have ensured peace and which now brought all the dangers it had been formerly argued the Covenant involved, without any of the compensating advantages that would have been given. The Government was plugging leaks here and there as they appeared, but there was still no sign that it had constructive plans for building and strengthening the dam of collective security against war. Mr. Attlee stressed ■the importance of associating Russia with any league of Powers against aggression. Need for Quick Action. Sir Archibald Sinclair, the Liberal leader, also was. doubtful if the Government was bestirring Itself sufficiently at a time when it should be moving quickly and resolutely to build

up a general system of collective security. Such a system, he said, must be buttressed by force, and to that buttress Britain must contribute in proportion to its population, resources, and power, and must give the world convincing proof that she had resolved to do so. Nobody doubted that men could be obtained. The spirit of the British people was high, and they saw the danger clearly. Sir Archibald Sinclair also urged the necessity for a Ministry of Supply, and said he was anxious to see a closer approach to Russia. Mr. Winston Churchill joined in welcoming the assurances to Greece and Rumania, but maintained that the essence'of the policy of building up an alliance against an aggressor was speed and vigour. Half-measures were useless. Of first importance was the full inclusion of Russia in the defensive bloc. It was also imperative to foster unity in the Balkans. Mr. Churchill also entered a plea for compulsory service. Lives for Nothing. Mr. George Lansbury (Labour), asked what guarantee there was, if once more Europe was plunged into war, that the masses of soung men would not again have given their lives in an adventure whidh led nowhere. , Mr. Anthony Eden (Conservative) disagreed with Mr. Attlee.that the Government was pursuing the same old policy. It seemed to him that it was very definitely engaged upon a new policy. There could be no more serious new policy than the commitments that had been announced that day to Greece and Rumania. Britain and France, he contended, were doing what they could to build up what might be called a peace front. Faced -with the methods which had been adopted by other States, Britain had first of all to cry a halt, but she must make it absolutely plain that she was doing that not because she was filled with dislike or animosity to any people anywhere on earth but simply because if that process went on it would be impossible to hope to preserve peace. Mr. Eden said that the Government’s object was not encirclement of Germany, but the provision of an organization which would afford a basis for negotiations. There was no hope of bettering the situation till respect for international engagements was restored. It was a formidable task, but the policy which the House of Commons had already endorsed was the only ■one whereby the aim could be achieved.

Dr. Hugh Dalton (Labour) said that it would be better to suspend the operation of the Anglo-Italian agreement if it was not to be denounced. He suggested that Britain should call a conference of the Montreaux Powers. Labour desired an Anglo-French-Russian military alliance. Russia was a great pacific Power in the same way as Britain, and in lesser degree France. New Zealand, Australia and Canada all touched the Pacific. It would be common sense for Britain, Russia and France to act in concert for common action in the Pacific. Position of Russia. Replying for tlie Government, Sir John Simon, ■ Chancellor of the Exchequer, said lie trusted that the House would realize that the suggestion that Russia was not being consulted was not justified. Dr. Dalton at this point interrupted to ask if the Government at any time had proposed a definite military alliance between France, tlie Soviet and Britain. Sir John Simon replied that it was difficult to state certain things in a public debate, but he would meet the point in another way. There was no objection in principle to such a proposition. Britain’s tradiional policy had been to commit herself by precise assurances of military and naval aid in certain definite cases only.

Regarding Europe generally, particularly those parts furthest from Britain, Britain’s policy has been that she should not undertake precise commitments, but would act as the case warranted. There was no fact more striking, said Sir John, than that it has been possible to transform this policy by aciding a series of most formidable commitments with the approval of the people. It would be well if the heads of totalitarian states considered the change. It was not a change in the nature of the British people, nor a sudden loss of British historical senses, but was a change in Europe. The debate was adjourned till next Tuesday. CROWDS IN DOWNING STREET Ministers Consider Final Draft Of Speech (Independent Cable Service.) LONDON, April 13. Crowds gathered early in Downing Street to witness the arrival of Ministers for the Cabinet meeting at which the final form of the Government’s declaration to Parliament was decided in the light of the latest diplomatic advices from Rome, Alliens and Ankara. Before the Cabinet meeting at 11 a.m. the Leader of the Opposition and Dr. Hugh Dalton called nt 10 Downing Street and conferred with the I’rimy Minister for 15 minutes. Lord Runciman and Mr. Malcolm MacDonald were the only absentees from th;- Cabinei. It is understood that the Cabinet is also considering ithe question of the creaition of a Ministry of Supply.