POLITICAL STORM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20234, 19 April 1929, Page 11

POLITICAL STORM.

COMMONS DEBATE.

INTERNATIONAL DEBTS.

(ALLIED AGREEMENTS.

ATTITUDE OF LABOUR.

[LEADER STATES POLICY.

By Telegraph—-Press Association—Copyright. Australian Press Association—United Sorvico (Received April 19. 5.5 p.m.)

British Wireless. LONDON. April 17. In the course of to-day's debate on the Budget in tho House of Commons tho Secretary of State for War, Sir Laming Worthington-Evans, replied to tho attack made yesterday by Mr. Philip Snowden. Labour member for Colno Valley, Yorkshire, upon tho Allied debt settlement.

In regard to figures quoted liv Mr. Snowden purporting to show that the United Stales had extracted from France and Italy better terms than Britain had done, Sir Laming said they were merely lump sums—the total of all the annual payments to bo made year by year over a period of 62 years, without any regard for the time, of payment. '"Now 1 come to tho most serious aspect of Mr. Snowden's speech," said the Minister, "and I v.vmt to be very careful to choose my words. Wo were all greatly surprised and startled yesterday by tho statement which Mr. Snowden made, namely, that ho and his party would, if returned to power, hold themselves freo to repudiate the fundamental principles of tho Balfour Note—that Britain should take no more from Europo by way of debt and reparation payments than sho requires in order to pay her o\y ij obligations to tho United States.

Wanton and Reckless to Repudiate. "That principio has been for seven years the foundation of the treatment of European debt problems by every Government which has held oflico in Britain. It is Surely a wanton and reckless act, in no way called for by anything that has occurred, for Mr. Snowden and his party now to threaten to repudiate a principle upon which every forward step toward European reconstruction and peace has been taken. "If such a declaration were persisted in and if Europe were led to believe that the policy aimed at was to obtain larger payments of debts and reparation than were required for our payments to the United States, the utmost injury would be done, not only to British interests, but to the wider interests of the peace of the world."

Sir Laming said he believed Mr. liamsay Mac Donald, Leader of the Labour Party, would speak later in tho debate. He asked him formally whether he accepted and endorsed tho declaration of Mr. Snowden, and if it constituted the official policy of the Labour Party ? Snowden Declines to Withdraw Words. Mr. Snowden, rising, said he was surprised that any observations of his should be the subject of discussion by the Cabinet and that a memorandum from Hie Cabinet should be presented to that House. The mambcr added:—

"I decline to make any apology for that I said yesterday. 1 do not intend to' withdraw a single word of it. I must express my surpriso at the prominence and attention that has been given to my remarks, for it was by no means the first time I had made that statement in the House of. Commons."

The policy of the Labour Party regarding debt settlement had often been stated, continued Mr. Snowden. It was that it would favour ail all-round cancellation of debts and reparation. That policy was enunciated m the concluding sentences of the Balfour memorandum, ;which the member proceeded to quote. It was not that part of the Balfour Note ho had attacked yesterday. It was the other part of it, to the effect that if an all-round cancellation of debt and reparation/ could not bo secured Britain should put a burden on herself for the benefit of her Continental neighbour. To that the Labour Party was opposed Snd always had been opposed.

Not a Considered Statement. The members of the Labour Party had been taunted with being friends of every country but (heir own. "I ain sufficient of an Englishman," declared Mr. Snowden, " not to be content to see my country and my people bled white for the benefit of other countries who are far more prosperous than ourselves." Tho member recall-id tho words he had used yesterday, and asserted that there was not one word among them about, repudiation of debt. As to the circumstances which were likely to arise when his party would hold itself open to repudiate the conditions of the Balfour Note, did the Government think the

present conditions in regard to international debt and reparation were likely

to be permanent'! Was there any man who thought the debt agreements winch had been made

Were going to remain in force without change o>- without, modification for the next. 60 years? The Committee of Experts on Reparation was sitting in Paris, arid he contended that its members were just as much concerned with tho question of inter-Allied debts as with the question of reparation. lie said lie had made his

statement on the previous evening on the spur of the moment. It was not a considered statement, at all, but if he hail hail limn to prepare a statement ho did not think tie could have improved on that, which lie had >nadc.

Was it not a common practice, almost a daily practice, of the Foreign Office to enter info communication with foreign Government,:- about Llie revision and amendment ot treaties which had been found to inflict hardship? Was the practice of denouncing treaties altogether unknown?/ It wis perfectly absurd to bay that an agreement entered'into by one Government should be binding upon , future Governments to accept, and never to say thai bv negotiations it could not he changed.

I hat was what he had meant when he flaid that if circumstances arose when tho Labour Party was in ollico, and the question of an amendment or revision of tho -Allied debts arose, then it would consider itself free to enter into negotiations to revise aiid alter tho Balfour JSote.