§ 14. Mr. CHURCHILLasked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs the total amount of the annuities and other payments for which the Irish Free State is now in default; the total amount received from the duties which have been imposed on Irish imports; and what steps he proposes to take, by increased duties or otherwise, to secure the British taxpayer against loss?
Mr. J. H. THOMASAs regards the first and second parts of the question, the sums withheld by the Irish Free State amounted to £ 1,750,000 by the 15th July, 1932, when the special duties came into force. The sums withheld between that date and the 28th February, 1933, amounted to £ 2,910,000. The approximate total amount collected up to the 28th February in respect of the special duties and the duties under the Import Duties Act, 1932, on goods imported from the Irish Free State, is £ 2,123,000. As regards the third part of the question, I can assure my right hon. Friend that the matter is receiving my constant personal consideration.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLIs the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with these figures?
§ Mr. LANSBURYWill the right hon. Gentleman divide the last figure, namely, £2,123,000? I understand that that includes the ordinary Import Duties that are levied on everyone. Would he tell us how much of that represents special duties?
Mr. THOMASI could not divide the figure. I would point out to my right hon. Friend that, in consequence of the action of the Irish Free State, they do 984 not participate in the benefits that arise from Ottawa, so that the two must of necessity be kept together.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIs it-not possible to tell the House what is the actual amount that we have received from the penal duties that are inflicted?
Mr. THOMASThere are no penal duties, and it would be a profound mistake if there were any such impression. The duties imposed were the only means open to us for obtaining what was due to the British taxpayer. They are not penal.
§ Mr. MAXTONDo I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that all the steps he has taken up to now, penal and friendly, leave this country £ 2,000,000 to the bad?
Mr. THOMASNo. All the steps that I have taken up to now have obtained £ 2,000,000 from those people for the people of this country, which they would not have obtained if I had not taken those steps.
§ Mr. MAXTONBut we are still £ 2,000,000 short.
§ Mr. LUNNCan the right hon. Gentleman say how the trade between the two countries has been affected by this policy within the last few months?
§ Mr. LANSBURY (by Private Notice)asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs if he has received any recent communication from the Irish Free State as to the financial dispute?
Mr. THOMASYes, Sir. I received officially on 3rd March the following letter from the High Commissioner for the Irish Free State:
§ "3rd March,1933.
§ Dear Mr. Thomas,
§ You will remember that I wrote to you on the 4th of July of last year confirming what I had already told you in conversation, namely, that the sums received from the Land Annuities and other charges were being set aside by the Irish Free State Government in separate Suspense Accounts in anticipation of arbitration.
§ My Government now consider that no useful purpose can be served by the further retention of these monies in the Suspense Accounts. They have, therefore, decided to use them to finance normal Exchequer requirements and they desire me to inform you accordingly.
§ Yours sincerely,
§ (Sgd.) JOHN W. DULANTY.''
985§ I have replied to-day as follows:
§ " 7th March, 1933.
§ Dear Mr. Dulanty,
§ I have received your letter of the 3rd March in which you intimate that the Irish Free State Government have decided to appropriate for normal Exchequer requirements the sums received from the land annuities and other charges which have hitherto been placed in separate suspense accounts in anticipation of arbitration.
§ The United Kingdom Government have received this intimation with regret. Their offer of arbitration or negotiation still remains open and they cannot be understood to acquiesce in the action now announced.
§ Yours sincerely,
§ (Sgd.) J. H. THOMAS."
§ Mr. THORNEDoes the right hon. Gentleman not think that both Governments are committing felo de se?
§ Mr. LANSBURYMay I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will consult the Cabinet as to the advisability of reconsidering the whole question of the terms of arbitration, as the issue now appears to be so narrow to outsiders, being concerned only as to whether both Governments cannot agree on some man in the world to be chairman of the board of arbitration? Neither nation is gaining anything but both are being injured, and in the end someone will have to settle the matter. Why not try again?
Mr. THOMASNo one would suggest for a moment that any member of the Government or of this House is happy about it or desires this state of affairs to continue, but we think it would be a mistake not to keep the facts clearly in mind. If it were such a narrow issue as my right hon. Friend suggests, there might be possibilities of meeting it, but it is not a narrow issue. Apart entirely from the financial question involved, there is also the political aspect which is involved in the violation of the Treaty. With regard to the suggestion that there is no man in the world who can act as chairman, I do not for one moment say that there is no man in the world who may be chairman of the tribunal, but equally I resent the suggestion that there is not a man within the Empire who is capable of acting as chairman.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIf there are these other questions, these political questions, is it not a fact that the British Government and the Irish Free State Government have both agreed that the subject 986 matter dealt with in the correspondence should be settled by arbitration? I understand that the only outstanding question is where you shall select the chairman of the arbitration tribunal, and all I am asking the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues is to consider whether in all the circumstances of the case, and the injury which is being done to both countries, it would not be an act of grace on the part of His Majesty's Government to give way on that one point?
Mr. THOMASMay I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to two things? The first intimation that this Government received was not a communication from the Irish Free State asking for a discussion to consider or review the question, but a bald intimation that they were not going to pay. Notwithstanding that, from the commencement in answering questions and in every public speech I have made, I have never shut the door. The communication I have just read from Mr. Dulanty, as representing Mr. de Valera, is again a bald intimation that they propose to use for another purpose money that by Statute was intended to be earmarked for a specific purpose. Notwithstanding that I have replied, even to-day, that, as far as we are concerned, the offer of arbitration or negotiation still remains open. Surely no greater indication could be given of our desire for a friendly settlement, but there are times and occasions, there are circumstances, when we must not simply humiliate ourselves.
§ Mr. LANSBURYI do not propose to pursue the matter further except to say that it is a well-known fact that the right hon. Gentleman in making that offer knows perfectly well that the one obstacle to its acceptance is that he himself lays down a condition for the arbitration tribunal which he knows the Irish Free State cannot accept. I wish to make that quite clear.
Mr. THOMASSo that it shall be quite clear, let me say that I did not lay down that condition. The condition I laid down is that I am prepared on behalf of the Government to confirm and offer to the Irish Free State the arbitration which was unanimously endorsed by the Imperial Conference, to which the Irish Free State were parties.
§ Mr. LANSBURYThat is not true.
§ Mr. MAXTONI want to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he does not consider that the over-riding political consideration in this matter is the establishment of friendship between the two nations, and whether he does not realise that the failure of his policy is embittering feeling and widening the breach?
Mr. THOMASI agree with the hon. Member; the over-riding consideration in this, as in most matters, is the friendly relations between the two nations, but I would also remind the hon. Member that there are such things as honour and justice, which must be observed by others.