IMPERIAL RELATIONS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 19032, 9 June 1924, Page 5

IMPERIAL RELATIONS

STATEMENT BY MR. MACDONALD

LONDON, June 6. In the Houre of Commons, Mr. Ramsay MacDonald announced that Canada had acquiesced in the ratification of the Lausanne Treaty, He hoped the Irish Free State would also agree, and so enable the Treaty to be ratified.

In regard to foreign policy, Mr. MacDonald expresed the opinion that if we were going to engage in further negotiations that would commit either the honour or the resources of the Empire, the Imperial Conference resolution in this connection should be the subject of very careful enquiry by constitutional representatives of the Dominions, as well as by Britain. The representatives of the Dominions were men of wide experience in Government and constitutional working sitting with us as a sort of specialised sub committee, or as a committee at the Imperial Conference to explore whether we could not make some provision. The resolution must be a little more definite so as to remove possible misunderstandings, but he emphasised that the British Government must have power to make rapid decisions. He said, that, on three important occasions in his own brief experience, it was very necessary for him to take his courage in his hands and risk the consequences, and say: ‘That is our decision,” and on each occasion the result justified his action.

Mr. MacDonald emphasised that the so-called Chanak telegram had tremendously changed the relations betwen the Dominions and Britain. He promised a statement to the House before anything definite was done. LONDON, June 6. In the House of Commons, in the course of debate, Sir Edward Grigg denounced the omission of the late Government to send separate plenipotentiaries to Lausanne The result was that the Lausanne Treaty was only a peace treaty, not signed by the whole Empire. Mr. MacDonald said that, in regard to procedure in future, the Government stood by the resolutions of the late Imperial Conference: That the Dominions interested should be inthe formed before treaty negotiations opened, and where their interests are directly concerned, they should be represented. So far as he was concerned. that resolution would always be put into operation. He expressed the opinion that the time would come when we must consider what machinery is required to be erected to conduct a united Imperial policy, particularly in regard to foreign affairs. MR LLOYD GEORGE SOUNDS A WARNING Mr Lloyd George condemned the late Government’s action, and declared that all they did was to tell the dominions they had agreed with the Allies that the dominions were not to be represented. He asked what would be the position in event of trouble in the East? He pointed out that Russia would not abandon her aspirations to Constantinople and the Straits, while he could not imagine that Italy would be always satisfied to see great derelict lands, which were once prosperous under the Italian flag, languish under the Turkish flag, without making some effort. Turkey might always be depended upon to provide a quarrel. Trouble was inevitable in the East. Captain W. A. G. Ormsby Gore declared that Mr Lloyd George’s remarks were most mischievous.

Earl Winterton said that had Mr Lloyd George’s Turkish policy been allowed to proceed, it would have gone a long way towards making the problem of the Government of India impossible. There was nobody more universally distrusted in India, or whose policy was believed to have been more disastrous to the relations of India, than Mr Lloyd George. ANOTHER IMPERIAL CONFERENCE FORESHADOWED Received June 8, 10.30 p.m. I LONDON, June 7. Newspapers interpret Mr MacDonald’s statement in. the House of Commons on the Lausanne Treaty as foreshadowing a further conference with the dominions to lay down future procedure. Mr MacDonald remarked: “The Colonial Office sends out a weekly cablegram to Australasia, Canada and Africa, outlining foreign events. Naturally, dominion Ministers begin to express opinions thereon, but the opinions expiessed at the end of long cablegrams are not negotiations. The question arises whether it is possible or accessary to supplement them by creating contact, which comes nearer to a share of obligation and removes misunderstanding.”