LORD LLOYD'S RESIGNATION

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 24, 27 July 1929, Page 9

LORD LLOYD'S RESIGNATION

GOVERNMENT CRITICISED

INQUIRY AS TO REASONS

United Press Association—By Electric Telejraph—Copyright.

Australian Pres3 Association—United Service.

(Received 27th July, 10 a.m.)

LONDON, 26th July. On the motion for the adjournment of the House of Commons for the summer recess, Mr. Baldwin (C.) drew attention to the great gravity of the matter of Lord Lloyd's resignation or dismissal from the High Commissionership of Egypt. He hoped that Mr. Henderson would be able to dispel Wednesday's mist which had developed on Thursday for the House of Lords. Mr. Baldwin traced the history of our policy in Egypt to the 1922 Declaration recognising Egypt's independence subject to reservations. He alluded to the failure of the Zaghloul Pasha Treaty, in which it was stated that the presence of British troops in no way meant occupation, or prejudiced Egypt's sovereign rights. (Labour laughter.) Mr. Baldwin said that the failure was due to the extremists' belief that they would get better terms under another Government, but there was nothing in the negotiations between Zaghloul and Mr. MacDonald to show that the laller was prepared for any serious departure from the 1922 Declaration.

Mr.^ Baldwin recalled Mr. MacDpnald's statement to the House just prior to his defeat in 1924, that no Government in the light of the world War could divest itself wholly of its interest in the Suez Canal, a vital link in British communications. (Opposition cheers.) Lord Lloyd had occupied one of the most difficult posts. He was of the type which is not afraid to speak its mind, and is able to argue and .criticise. It was the Foriegn Office's duty to listen and receive. Their representative must carry out his instructions, or, if he disagreed, resign, if he regarded the subject as a sufficiently important matter of principle. Why did Lord Lloyd resign or why was he dismissed? The question was far greater than Lord Lloyd's, personality. Did the Government desire his resignation because they did not want a Public servant who criticised its decisions? Did it want a dummy, or was there a change of policy which would lead to Lord Lloyd's resignation so that it was simpler to* get him out of the way before the change of policy occurred. (Opposition cheers.) Mr. Henderson replied: "Every move we have made, or contemplate making, to improve Egyptian relations, will be influenced by the spirit of goodwill. I say emphatically there has been no change of policy. There is no secret about it. It has been suggested that negotiations took place behind Lord Lloyd's back. I challenge that most emphatically. Whatever be our policy, it will not be put into operation until it has, been submitted for the approval of tlie House of Commons and the Egyptian people. We shall take no step without consulting the Dominions." Mr. Churchill said that there had been a certain streak of prejudice in the Foreign Office against Lord Lloyd, part of which was natural and understandable, since Lord Lloyd was not in the Civil Service.

Mr. MacDonaid described Mr. Churchill's speech as a mischievous and unjustifiable attack on the Civil Service, based on contemptible tittle tattle. Mr. Mac Donald added: "We shall pursue our examination of the Egyptian question. Nothing final can be done until the House has ratified it. I appeal to tlie House not to do anything further to damage Egypt, but let us get on with the business."

The debate then terminated,