NO MENTION OF LEAGUE

Southland Times, Issue 23342, 28 October 1937, Page 5

NO MENTION OF LEAGUE

BRITISH POLICY STATEMENT

LABOUR CRITICISM OF KING’S SPEECH EMPHASIS ON SANCTITY OF TREATIES (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright) (Received October 27, 11.5 p.m.) LONDON, October 27. The Daily Herald albne draws attention to and comments on the fact that for the first time since the National Government was formed in 1931 the King’s Speech at the opening of Parhament yesterday included no specific statement that the Government s foreign policy would be based on the Lea «gue of Nations. The King’s Speech, The Daily Herald points out, is accepted as indicating the policy of the Government, and there was widespread concern when the significant omission was realized. The Leader of the Labour Opposition (Major C. R. Attlee) in the House of Commons said the Speech from the Throne indicated no attempt whatever at a settlement of the international situation. He criticized the Government’s attitude to Spain and China, and would like to see some reference to the sanctity of treaties and the need for establishing law and order. “A startling thing in the speech is the complete omission of any reference to unemployment in the distressed areas, said Major Attlee. “Therefore the Opposition submits an amendment, pointing out serious omissions and failure to face the problems of peace and the establishment of sound economic conditions ” “LEAGUE BETRAYED” The amendment, which will be moved by Mr Herbert Morrison on behalf of the Labour Party, is as follows: — ' The Labour Opposition regrets that your Majesty’s advisers by their weak vacillating policy on foreign affairs, which has gravely imperilled the prospects of lasting peace and national security, have betrayed the principles of the League of Nations and seriously diminished British influence, and by their lack of any constructive fundamental preparations for raising the standard of living upon a just and enduring basis have forfeited the confidence of this House. The Leader of the Liberals (Sir Archibald Sinclair) said that one of the most extraordinary omissions in the speech was the absence of any mention of the League of Nations as a basis of Government policy, although this was to the forefront in the last two King’s Speeches. “The supporters of collective security will not fail to draw their own conclusions,” said Sir Archibald. “I hope the Brussels conference will result in peace. But is the Government going to help China in her extremity, or is there to be a farce like Abyssinia—another fait accompli, encouraging aggression throughout the world?” GOOD TRADE PROSPECTS

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir John Simon), who replied on behalf of the Government, took up a reference by Major Attlee to the trade cycle and the danger of a slump. The improvement in the economic position of the country during the last five or six years had continued during the present year, and he did not think there was any possible indication that it was going to be arrested. In each quarter of the present year British overseas trade had shown an all round expansion compared with the corresponding quarter of the previous year. Imports and domestic exports had increased not only in value but in volume, and industrial production had continued to rise. Sir John stated the latest index number worked out for the second quarter of this year was the highest index for industrial production yet recorded for any quarter. At the same time there had been no halt in the expansion of retail trade. After- considering certain less satisfactory pointers, such as a temporary decrease in building plans, Sir John concluded that on a fair view there was no ground whatever for assuming that

trade was likely to suffer an early decline. Replying to an inquiry in the speech by Major C. R. Attlee about the King’s proposed visit to India, Sir John said: “His Majesty’s desire to make this very important visit is well understood, and we have no doubt that the time chosen will be one that will be best.”