PLAIN SPEAKING IN THE COMMONS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 18783, 17 May 1923, Page 5

PLAIN SPEAKING IN THE COMMONS

In the House of Commons, Mr Ramsay MacDonald, leader of the Labour Party, initiated a debate on Britain’s relations with Russia. He strongly urged a conference rather than the breaking of the trade agreement, a step which might lead to serious consequences. The Government's spokesman said Britain was sick of negotiating with Russia. While theire was no desire on Britain’s part to act harshly, Russia maty observe the treaty obligations. Krassin. the Soviet representative who is in London, announced Russia’s anxiety to have the trouble fettled amicably.

By Telegraph.—Press Association. —Copyright. LONDON. May 15. In Committee of Supfffy. on +he Foreign Office vote. Mr Ramsay MacDonald moved a resolution. He initiated a debate on the Note to Russia. M. Krassin occupied a seat’in the Distinguished Strangers’ Gallery. MR RAMSAY MACDONALD OPENS DISCUSSION. Mr Mac Donal I said that in view of the Soviet’s icply the Government ought to make an immediate statement as to its future policy towards Russia He hoped tlie Government would not be pursuing the old defeated policy of the Coalition Government of opposition to Russia merely because it did not agree with Russian political opinions. It was time we accepted Russia as a fact without associating ourselves with Russians’ actions. Many of our grievances against her would never have arisen if we had | recognised her diplomatically. Mr Mac-: Donald said inc agreed that if some of I ••.he charges made by the British against' the Russian Government were proved o were fully entitled te protest, but' many of the charges had been found to I be untrue. This country could not n-f- * ford to take action unless certain -hat its position was unassailable. That meant a conference, and the Government should 3fly that they were prepared to go into the whole matter with Russia, because we wanted to settle the question once and for all. He urged the Government to use the Soviet reply as a basis for negotiations. The question of religious persecution required examination. Mr MacDonald said he did not altogether accept the Soviet’s statement that their action had taken the form of political punishment and not religious persecution, but in times of revolution the two things were often mixed up. The mere tearing up of a trade agreement would smooth the way for further developments and keep the door open for more sympathetic relations between the two countries. If the agreement was ievoked a state of incipient war would be created.: THE GOVERNMENT S REPLY. Mr Ronald F. McNeil, Under-Secre-tary for Foreign Affairs, replying, deprecated all the talk about the possibility of war. Th? whole matter had been taken out of its proper perspective. Mr McNeil said everyone desired to pre-t-erve harmonious relations with all foreign nations, including Russia. The British people would not easily forget Russia’s- heroic sacrifices in the war. ; The Government was not proposing io; tear up the trade agreement. The ob- * jec.t was to see its provisions observed. The sole question was whether, under the circumstances which had now arisen, this agreement was one that could be continued by one party when the other party persistently violated it. (Cheers). In any case the most expert business opinion strongly held to the view that the termination of the agreement would not harmfully affect our trade. The fact was that Russia hjui never observed the agreement. The stoppage of propaganda was an essential part of the agreement, and although as a result of Notes and complaints the propaganda complained of was de’riyed from wireless messages. They were only a small section out of the vast amount of evidence in the Government’s j possession showing that propaganda was persistently carried on. Up to the present the Government had acted with extraordinary patience in the matter. There were no less han 116 cases of British subjects wrongfully imprisoned by the Russian Government. One lady during eight months was in 29 different prisons. Some of these people died □wing to prison privations. Despite the British Note, the Soviet Government refused to meet these cases.

With regard to trawlers, some satisfaction was offered, but no suggestion of compensation The Government could not accept the position that the invasion of our rights could lie met by an international conference. Altogether the reply was entirely unsatisfactory. It contained no fort of assurance for the future. The British Government had negotiated until sick of negotiating. It was ready to discuss the matter with M. Krassin. but would not lie satisfied with anything less than compliance with their demands. (Cheers).