§ 52. Mr. LYLE-SAMUELasked the Prime Minister when the House will have an opportunity of discussing the Mandates bestowed upon this country by the League of Nations; what form the discussion will take; and whether the House will be enabled to express an opinion by vote upon the Mandates?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI would refer my hon. Friend to the answers given yesterday by the Prime Minister in reply to a question by my Noble Friend the Member for Hitchin.
§ Mr. LYLE-SAMUELIs the right hon. Gentleman aware of the desire, universal throughout this country, that before this country is committed to accept and adopt any Mandate, there should be full discussion in this House and that the authority for these Mandates should be derived from the decision of this House?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that yesterday the Prime Minister stated that these were in the nature of treaties with foreign Powers? Is the right hon. Gentleman not of opinion that they are much more in the nature of giving new constitutions to other countries, and that, therefore, they ought to be treated as the Government of India Bill was treated, by reference to a Joint Committee of both Houses?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo. I hope my hon. and gallant Friend will not think it strange if I find myself in closer agreement with the Prime Minister than with him. As regards the question put by the hon. Member (Mr. Lyle-Samuel) the matter was dealt with very fully by the Prime Minister yesterday, and I can add nothing to what he said.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEEThe Prime Minister said yesterday that this House would have an opportunity of accepting or rejecting. If they are to have that opportunity how can they have it without a vote?
§ Mr. LYLE-SAMUELMay I press the Leader of the House to say whether or not that is the final decision of the Government?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINIf a motion supported by any considerable body of opinion be put down recommending that we decline to accept a mandate for any of the mandatory territories, of course the House will have an opportunity of discussing the proposition, but I should like to see the motion first.
§ Mr. LYLE-SAMUELDoes the right hon. Gentleman not agree that it is not a matter for the Government to decide whether the representation has sufficient authority or not, but whether the Government will now affirm that no mandate ought to be accepted by the British Government unless it has been first discussed in this House and this House has given its authority.
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThat question was answered by my right hon. Friend yesterday, and to the answer I have nothing to add.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREIs it not a fact that the question as to the acceptance of a mandate was decided a long time 106 ago, after the San Remo decision of the Supreme Council, and that the only question now is the actual terms of the draft mandates as submitted to the Government by the Council of the League? Would it be possible to arrange for some general discussion, if it is the wish of the House, on the actual draft terms, so that if any hon. Member has individual criticism to make on these drafts he would have an opportunity of submitting those criticisms to the Government?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI do not know whether my hon. Friend was in the House yesterday when the Prime Minister answered the question. If he was he will remember that my right hon. Friend dealt specifically with the particular suggestion which the hon. Member has made. My hon. Friend is perfectly right in stating that the general principle of the acceptance of a mandate has been discussed by the House and approved by it. [HON. MEMBBES: "No."] The detailed discussion of the general terms of a mandate was dealt with in the answer of my right hon. Friend yesterday, and I would ask my hon. and gallant Friend to look again at that answer.
§ Lord R. CECILDid I understand the Prime Minister rightly to state that at some stage or another there would be a definite opportunity given to this House to say whether they would accept or reject a mandate before it is finally settled? What some of us are anxious to know is whether the Prime Minister has been rightly understood in that respect, and, secondly, what kind of opportunity will be given, whether it will be the same kind of opportunity given to us in reference to the other big treaties, or in what other way?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINAs to procedure I cannot answer exactly at the present moment. If there is a desire in the House to challenge the acceptance of a mandate on seeing the terms of that mandate, the Government will give an opportunity to the House in some form or another to take a decision on the matter.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSDid not the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor quite frankly admit the right of the House to discuss a mandate without it being neces- 107 sary for us to put down what would be, in effect, a vote of censure on the Government? We do not want to do that.
Mr. CHAMBERLAINMy hon. Friend will not expect me to be conscious of all the answers given by my predecessor. If he will refer me to a specific answer given by my predecessor I should be much obliged if he would call my attention to it by letter.