§ 14. Mr. PONSONBYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the inconvenience and obstruction to international intercourse caused by a rupture of diplomatic relations and the consequent absence from their posts of diplomatic representatives, His Majesty's Government will abandon 1010 this method of expressing disapproval of the action of a foreign Government and permit the resumption of their normal functions by the diplomatic missions?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINThe rupture of diplomatic relations clearly causes inconvenience, but there are occasions, happily rare, when this inconvenience is inevitable, namely, when a State has so abused those relations that the continued presence of its official representatives can no longer serve a useful purpose.
§ Mr. PONSONBYIn a case where there are strained relations between the countries and grave matters in dispute, is it not all the more necessary to have diplomatic missions to the respective Governments?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINIt entirely depends upon what purpose those diplomatic missions have.
§ Sir WILLIAM DAVISONIs it not a fact that the relations are likely to become more strained if these so-called diplomatic representatives used their diplomatic status to plot against a country?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is a matter for argument.