§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEOwing to the very important nature of the statement made by the Secretary of State for India and the Answer of the Prime Minister, I beg to ask leave to move the adjournment of the House to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance—namely, the statement made by the Secretary of State for India at Farnham that it is proposed to confer with the Colonies next year on the subject of colonial preferences, notwithstanding the declarations of the First Lord of the Treasury and of Lord Lansdowne that the subject will not be dealt with by the Government during the lifetime of the present Parliament.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThat is the view of the Secretary of State for India.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThis cannot be brought within the plea of urgency. The speech of the Secretary for India was made some days ago, and therefore, so far as urgency is concerned, the hon. Member is too late. Then, again, as the Conference is only to be held next year, it can hardly be said that the matter is one of urgent importance.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEOn the question of order, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, surely Motions for adjournment have been allowed in reference to the fiscal question, although the Prime Minister has declared that it is not going to be dealt with during the present session of Parliament. May I submit also that it is a declaration made by the Minister responsible for India, which will be represented at this Conference, in respect to a perfectly new policy, departing from the policy of the Government in respect to something which may happen during the lifetime of the present Parliament? Therefore, I submit that it is a question of urgency. As to the second point, the fact that the speech was made some days ago, I may say that it was only yesterday afternoon 498 that we saw it, for it did not appear in the ordinary reports—the report in The Times is very summarized—and we could not move before, because there was a Motion for the adjournment yesterday.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKEROn the merits of the importance of the question of course I say nothing. I dare say the hon. Member has a very good case on that. But I really think it would be stretching the rule too far. After all, whether a decision is come to to-day or in a month's time, or before the end of the session, really seems to me immaterial.
§ MR. LLOYD GEORGEWe cannot raise it at all unless you accept this Motion.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKERIt can hardly be said that instructions to be given in reference to the holding of a Conference next year is a matter of urgent importance.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURMay I be permitted, in justice to my right hon. friend, who is not here, to say that I have his distinct authority for saying that he has been misinterpreted. All that he said was subject to the view which I have constantly expressed.
§ MR. SOARESDo we understand that he repudiates the report then?