§ On the Motion "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair,"
§
MR. HENRY LABOUCHERE
(Northampton) rose to move as an Amendment:—
That the time has come when effect should be given to the declarations of successive Administrations as to the government of Egypt by making arrangements for the speedy withdrawal of Her Majesty's forces from that country.
The hon. Member said, he could not go into the whole subject of Egypt on an
895
occasion like that. In the 1886 Parliament he raised the subject by moving the reduction of the Vote for men by the numbers of the English Army of Occupation in Egypt. The question was so large that, if he went into the whole of it, he should keep the House until midnight. There was no question that our armaments had increased of late by leaps and bounds. He attributed the cause of the increase largely to the fact that we were obliged to keep a large number of men in the Army permanently in Egypt, and in part to the fact that by our remaining in Egypt we created such distrust and ill-feeling in the whole of the civilised world, and particularly amongst the Powers of Europe, that our armaments were not only increased by the number of men in Egypt, but were necessarily increased elsewhere to put ourselves into a position to meet contingencies. The origin of our interference in Egypt was the question of finance.
§ * MR. SPEAKERI think it would be convenient to state the limits within which the hon. Member will be able to discuss his Amendment. He is not entitled to go into the past history of the occupation of Egypt, or discuss any engagements this country may have entered into with other Powers, or any of the rules laid down by previous Governments as to our presence in Egypt. But he can deal with the existing state of things in regard to our Army of Occupation in Egypt, and with the point he seeks to raise that it should not be employed there any longer.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he would rather not, after that ruling, move his Motion, and would prefer to move it as he did in the Parliament of 1886, on the number of men, because, with all respect to the Speaker, whose ruling was no doubt perfectly correct, it would be absolutely impossible for him to discuss the question fairly under such conditions.
§ * MR. SPEAKERI may say that in 1885 a very similar Amendment to that of the hon. Member was moved on going into Supply on Army Estimates, and the then Speaker, Speaker Peel, laid down the rule very much as I have endeavoured to lay it down now.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREI do not complain in the least. No doubt your ruling 896 is correct, but I really cannot do it. [Laughter.]
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT (Monmouthshire, W.)said, he desired to know before they went further, what opportunities the Government would afford to discuss the present situation of this country with regard to Egypt. The subject was one the grave importance of which had been increased by recent events. He understood that the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs proposed to postpone the statement he announced he would make on the subject, and it was a great surprise and disappointment to the House that this was not forthcoming. The whole question of whether the troops should remain in Egypt at all, or whether they should go beyond Egypt into the Soudan, depended on the obligations under which we were with reference to Egypt. There should be full and fair opportunity to discuss the matter.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREasked the Leader of the House whether, in the circumstances, he would agree to bring on the Vote for the men on Monday, when they might go into the whole subject of Egypt by moving a reduction in the number of men.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTasked whether it was to be understood that on the Vote for the men the policy which led to our Army being in Egypt could be discussed.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, that, as a matter of positive fact, he raised the question of policy on the Vote for the men in 1886, when they had a full discussion of the reasons for the occupation of Egypt.
§ * MR. SPEAKERsaid, he would not anticipate what the decision of the Chairman of Committees might be when the point was raised.
§ SIR E. ASHMEAD - BARTLETT (Sheffield, Ecclesall)asked whether it would not be in order for the Under Secretary to make his statement now, on the Motion that the Speaker leave the Chair, with regard to the reoccupation of Dongola, and then the discussion on Egypt might take place on Monday.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid, he did not know whether it would be in order, but it would be inexpedient for the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs to make his statement 897 except under circumstances which would permit of discussion. By the Speaker's ruling they found themselves in an unexpected position. After the progress made in Supply it was anticipated that the Debate would be taken now. An appeal was made to him to to get the Vote for the men on Monday. The Chairman of Committees would probably regard the discussion in order on that Vote. But on Thursday night he made an arrangement with the hon. Member for East Mayo, by which he could raise a question as to Roman Catholics in the Army and Navy. It was impossible that the Speaker could leave the Chair that night on the Army Estimates and have a discussion on Vote 1. That Vote could not come on until the Speaker left the Chair. If the hon. Member for East Mayo would say, as he said on Friday night, that he would be content to bring on his Motion at 10 o'clock, the further question would arise whether Gentlemen anxious to discuss the Army Estimates would be prepared to finish their Debate about 10 o'clock. If those two discussions were satisfied, there would be no difficulty in bringing on the Vote for the men the first thing on Monday.
§ MR. J. DILLON (Mayo, E.)thought that the right hon. Gentleman made a fair and generous offer.
§ * SIR CHARLES DILKE (Gloucester, Forest of Dean)said, the difficulty was, that the Under Secretary for War had to make a statement which would be long and important, because the reorganisation of the War Office had proceeded on lines somewhat different from those that were anticipated in July last. The late Secretary for War would probably have some remarks to make upon it; and there must be some discussion, although not necessarily a long one.
§ MR. JOHN MORLEY (Montrose Burghs)said, the statement of the Under Secretary would probably affect materially the course of the discussion on Egyptian affairs.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYThen we will begin with my hon. Friend's statement.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTThe last time there was a discussion upon Egyptian affairs, I think in 1893, it was upon the Motion that the Speaker do now leave the Chair. [Sir C. DILKE:"On the 898 Civil Service Estimates."] I do not know whether in this respect there is any difference between the Civil Service and the Army Estimates.
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe Civil Service Estimates contain the salary of the Foreign Secretary, on which questions of foreign policy can be raised, but on the Army Estimates a Debate must be relative to the Army Estimates.
§ MR. J. MORLEYsaid, the House would not be in a position to discuss the Egyptian question with advantage until a statement had been made by the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid, it was clear that, until the House was in possession of facts which the Under Secretary would communicate, it would be impossible to debate them. The arrangement then was that the discussion on general Army matters should be continued till about 10 o'clock, when the hon. Member for Mayo would raise his question on the Navy Votes. On Monday they would take Vote A for the Army, and the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs would make his statement on that Vote; he would either begin or follow the hon. Member for Northampton, as might be thought, necessary or convenient. The Debate being brought to a conclusion about 10 o'clock, the Financial Secretary to the War Office would make his statement with regard to the Army. There remained only the question whether the beginning should be made by the hon. Member or by the Under Secretary; it would perhaps be as well that the under Secretary should know what questions he had to answer.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREVery well, then, I will begin.