§ 59. Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Lord Privy Seal whether consideration of the Mesopotamian Mandate has 1799 been delayed by the League of Nations at the request of the American Government; and, if so, whether he will publish the correspondence on the subject?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe decision of the Council of the League to postpone the consideration of the Mandates, including that of Mesopotamia, till its next meeting was taken independently of any request from the American Government, and was concurred in by the British representative. The decision regarding the publication of correspondence between the American Government and the Council rests with the latter.
§ Lord R. CECILCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether consideration of the Palestine Mandate has also been postponed?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI understand so.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAnd the East African Mandate?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWYes.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSCan the right hon. Gentleman say, approximately, when the next meeting will be held?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWIt will be in two or three months, but I do not know the exact date.
§ 60. Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Mandates after agreement between the Government and the League of Nations will be submitted to this House in the form of Bills, or in what manner provision will be made to enable the House to amend them in regard to financial or other details?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI think that it is premature to answer this question until the Mandates have been dealt with by the League of Nations.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREWill the Government take into consideration the precedent of the action of the Australian Parliament with regard to New Guinea, which is embodied in the New Guinea Act, recently passed?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSWill the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear that as the Mandate will not come to this House until after it has been accepted 1800 we shall, in some way or other, retain control of the expenditure that is necessary under the Mandate?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI do not think that I can say more than I have said in the answer to previous questions. It is obvious that the final control must rest with the House of Commons.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI want the right hon. Gentleman to go a bit further, and say that it is not a mere question of putting the Mandate before us as a whole and accepting it or rejecting it. We may want the Mandate with amendments.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI do not see how that could be done. What would happen would be this: Assuming that the Mandate is presented as a Treaty would be presented, if the House of Commons does not like it and says "we would prefer it in this form," the Government of the day would then re-present it in the form in which the House of Commons would like it.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the fact that the Australian Government and Parliament did actually amend the forced labour clause of the Mandate with respect to New Guinea, and amended it in a progressive direction?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWFrom what I have said it is obvious that this House would have precisely the same powers.