§ LORD WELBYMy Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government whether the Minister for Foreign Affairs in Holland was correct in his statement, as reported in The Times, that Great Britain would abide by the Sugar Convention. I think there must be some misapprehension, because the Prime Minister distinctly said that an opportunity would be given to Parliament to discuss the matter before the Government was finally committed to the new Convention. It is extremely desirable, if there is such a misapprehension, that it should be removed in order that a false impression may not go forth to the world. I therefore venture to ask my noble friend whether there is any ground for the statement.
LORD HERSCHELLI think I shall be able in a very few words to give a satisfactory answer to the noble Lord. The statement which appeared in The Times probably referred to the fact that a Protocol was signed by the various Powers giving leave to Russia to increase her export of sugar up to the year 1915. This Protocol was not signed by the British representative on the ground that 782 we had in no way been parties to the limitation of Russian exports, and therefore we had no objection to offer to the Protocol referring to exports either in this year or in subsequent years. But the position really is that His Majesty's Government is in no way committed to remain a party to the Sugar Union after September 1, 1913, and I may further say that the Prime Minister has distinctly stated that before this question is settled one way or the other a full opportunity shall be given to Parliament for a discussion upon it.