HL Deb 10 April 1935 vol 96 cc715-22

LORD DANESFORT had the following Notice on the Paper: To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have made any protest to the Free State Government against their legislation declaring that all British citizens, whether in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland or elsewhere are to be treated as aliens in the Free State; whether any demand has been made by His Majesty's Government to the Free State Government that Orders made under the so-called reciprocity clauses in the Free State Citizenship Bill and in the Aliens Bill shall be compulsory, and shall not be left optional to the Executive Council of the Free State with power to repeal such Orders; whether the attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to a speech made by Mr. de Valera in the Senate on the 3rd April, 1935, in which he protested against Northern Ireland being separated from the Free State Government of Southern Ireland and against the retention by British Forces in accordance with the Treaty of certain ports in Southern Ireland; and whether any communications have passed between His Majesty's Government and the Free State Government on any of these subjects; and to move for Papers.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, perhaps you would kindly pardon me for raising again the question of what has been going on in the Irish Free State and for referring to some of the matters which were not completely discussed on the last occasion, on the second Bill. The noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, who answered me on that day, did not dispute any of the descriptions which I gave of the effect of the two Bills which were referred to—namely, the Citizenship Bill and the Aliens Bill. As I said, these Bills have the effect of depriving British citizens all over the world of their rights in the Irish Free State and of turning them into aliens. That statement which I gave as to the effect of the Bills was in no way denied by the noble Viscount.

What I ask now is, has his Majesty's Government made any protest to the Free State Government in regard to this flagrant illegality and injustice to British citizens? I think, if I may respectfully say so, that it would be to the advantage, not merely of British citizens all over the world, but also of the Free State Government itself, that an authoritative statement should be made in this House saying what is the view of His Majesty's Government as regards these recent pronouncements of the Free State Parliament. If a protest of the kind which I advocate is made, temperately, no doubt, but concisely, I think it would do much to clear the air and to enable our subjects all over the world to know how they stand as regards the Free State, and to know also what the attitude of His Majesty's Government is. If a protest of that kind is not made, what will the Free State say? They will say one of two things. They will either say that the Government acquiesce in this illegality—and I have no doubt that they would say that if no protest were made—or they will say that the Government are too careless, too supine, to make any protest of the sort, even when the interests of innumerable British subjects all over the world are concerned.

So much for the point as to the position of British subjects treated as aliens. There is another matter which arose in the debate on April 2 last. The noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, endeavouring, I suppose, to find some kind of palliation for this unpardonable action of the Free State Government, referred to what he called the "reciprocity clauses" in the two Bills. These clauses; be it noted, do not purport in any way to relieve the Bills of the illegality of making British subjects aliens in the Free State. All they do is this: they say that if Free State citizens—I am summarising the gist of the provision—are given privileges in foreign countries, then the Free State may—and I venture to emphasise that word "may"—by Orders confer similar privileges on foreigners in the Free State. What does that come to? It means that British subjects throughout the world may be given by the Free State Government the same position and the same privileges as if they were foreign aliens. What an act of condescension, and a condescension by this Free State Government, a small and hostile Government, a Government which has insulted the King and broken its treaty obligations. It is going to allow British subjects in certain cases to be on the same footing as foreign aliens! I venture to think that condescension of that sort is not to be allowed to pass without a strong comment on the part of His Majesty's Government.

But, it is to be noted that if this condescension is to be granted it is not as a matter of right. It is only to be at the will of the Irish Free State Government, and even if Orders are made they may be repealed at any time, at the will of the Free State Government. Therefore I ask His Majesty's Government whether they have requested the Free State Government that such Orders should be compulsory, and should not be at the option or temporary good will of the Free State Government. Even then there would still be the injustice and indignity of turning British subjects into aliens, although it would make the so-called reciprocity clauses somewhat real, instead of being ineffective and futile, as they are at present.

The noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, when he socke last week, was anxious that the whole picture should be filled in. On April 3, the very day after discussion took place in this House, Mr. de Valera did fill in another form of picture. Speaking in the Dail on the final stage of the Bill he bitterly com plained that what he called the Partition, that is, the separation of Northern Ireland from the Free State, should still exist. Does he really think that his actions and speeches with regard to treaties, with regard to His Majesty and the position of the Crown, and with regard to the relations between this country and the Free State, are going to induce Northern Ireland to give up their position of freedom under the British Crown, and to accept an inferior position under the Free State Government, who have shown themselves—I am sorry to have to say it, but it is no good mincing the fact or avoiding the truth of these matters—to be hostile to this country and insulting to His Majesty? If in this way the Free State Government hope to induce Ulster to abandon her position, and to come under the rule of the Free State Government, I think they will find that they are very grievously mistaken. Probably they realise already that this appeal to Ulster is futile and absurd, and not likely to bring about the slightest result.

There is only one other point to which I would refer. In that same speech on April 3 Mr. de Valera referrred to the fact that there are certain ports in Southern Ireland which by the Treaty were most properly retained in the possession of Great Britain for the purpose of security. Having stated that fact, Mr. de Valera made one of the most astounding remarks which even he has ventured to make. He claimed that those ports should now be taken out of the possession of the British Government, and handed over to the Free State Government. Is it really conceivable that any man who knows the facts, as I suppose Mr. de Valera must be presumed to know them, would seriously argue that the Free State Government could obtain the confidence of the Government of the United Kingdom to such an extent as to force or induce the Government of the United Kingdom to hand over to the Free State Government those ports which were carefully preserved by the Treaty in the possession of Great Britain, for the purpose of defence?

I only mention that to show to what length Mr. de Valera and his Government are prepared to go in violating all the obligations to which they and their predecessors are pledged. Finally, I ask whether the attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to these utterances of Mr. de Valera on April 3, and whether any communications have passed between His Majesty's Government and the Free State Government on this question. I think your Lordships would agree to this extent, that utterances of that sort ought not to go unchallenged, as though they were of no importance. Therefore I hope that some communications have taken place and that a statement will be made on the subject. I beg to move.

THE EARL OF LUCAN

My Lords, the position of the Government in regard to these two Bills, the Citizenship Bill and the Aliens Bill, which have lately been in the Irish Free State Parliament, has been made so abundantly clear, both in this House and elsewhere, that only a very brief reply is needed from me to the noble Lord's Question. I gave the noble Lord a very full answer on this subject on December 20 last and the Lord Chancellor went into the matter very thoroughly as lately as last week. On that occasion the Lord Chancellor undertook to convey to the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs certain remarks of the noble Lord, especially with regard to so-called reciprocity clauses in the Bills. These observations have, I understand, been considered by the Secretary of State, but he felt that no useful purpose would be served by making any communication to the Irish Free State Government in the sense suggested by the noble Lord.

LORD DANESFORT

Did he give any reason for that?

THE EARL OF LUCAN

He does not consider that any useful purpose would be served. Since then I understand that both Bills have passed both Houses of the Irish Free State Legislature. The Question of the noble Lord may be considered under four headings. The first is whether the Government have made any protests with regard to these Bills to the Irish Free State, and the second is whether any demand had been made by His Majesty's Government that these reciprocity clauses should be made compulsory instead of optional. These two points were fully and clearly dealt with by the Lord Chancellor on April 2, and I would not weary your Lordships by quoting his reply in full.

LORD DANESFORT

There is a point which was not touched on at all. It is in my Question. Has His Majesty's Government made any protest to the Irish Free State Government against their legislation declaring that British citizens are to be treated as aliens in the Free State?

THE EARL OF LUCAN

I thought the noble Lord would understand when I said that the opinion of the Secretary of State was that no useful purpose would be served by taking any such step. Last December I quoted the Secretary of State's answer in the House of Commons and also a speech he made at Derby, which my noble friend will probably remember. That referred to the Citizenship Bill, but this is the other Bill, the Aliens Bill. My answer to him is that no communication has been made on that Bill because the Secretary of State did not consider that any useful purpose would be served.

The third point of the noble Lord's Question is as to whether Mr. de Valera's speech on April 3 has been considered and what the views of the Government are. The Government have examined the reports which they have received of that speech. Their views are the same as have been frequently stated, and are well known, but I will quote quite briefly from the last portion of the speech of the Lord Chancellor last Tuesday, which clearly laid down the position of the Government: The view of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom is that Irish Free State citizenship does not deprive any person of his status as a subject of His Majesty. Further, the Lord Chancellor said: The established policy of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom is that all peoples of His Majesty, of whatever origin, should be treated alike in this country as regards admission and residence. The Lord Chancellor also said: His Majesty's Government propose to reserve their position until they see what form the Bills take when they become Acts of Parliament, and if, as is assumed, an Order is made under Clause 10 of the Aliens Bill"— that is the reciprocity clause, which was in both Bills. My noble friend complains that it is optional and not compulsory, but I think the Government's position is that they have no reason to doubt that the Order will be made. To continue the quotation from the speech of the Lord Chancellor: … if, as is assumed, an Order is made under Clause 10 … then no situation seems likely to arise which would call for any variation of the established policy of His Majesty's Government. It would, he added, be time enough when the Bills have become Acts to consider what will be the position. In general the opinion of the Government is that no useful purpose whatever is served by challenging any and every controversial statement which is made on the other side of the Channel, and indeed the Government Consider that continual protests of such a character could only serve to delay, if not to diminish any prospect of reaching, a satisfactory settlement of the outstanding issues between this country and the Irish Free State. The noble Lord may, however, be assured that the situation will in the future, as in the past, be carefully watched. The noble Lord will understand from that that there are no Papers that can be laid.

LORD DANESFORT

My Lords, I have to thank the noble Earl for his reply, but what he has said has carried neither conviction nor satisfaction to me. It is a matter of intense surmise to me to hear that the Dominions Secretary did not think it worth while in regard to a matter of vital importance, such as depriving British subjects of their rights, to say one word of protest to the Irish Free State upon such a glaring illegality. I understood the noble Earl to suggest that it was better not to make a protest because protests might eventually stop friendly relations, but we have been trying to get friendly relations for years and years since Mr. de Valera first came into office. What have we gained by it? Have we gained anything in the way of better relations? Have we done anything to stop Mr. de Valera in his gross injustices to British subjects? We have gained nothing, and I hope that the Dominions Secretary—for whom I have great respect in many ways, but not upon this matter—will think this matter over, and will come to the conclusion that the rights of British subjects are matters which it is worth his while to take into consideration. It is his manifest duty to make a protest on these matters against the illegality that is being committed. It is conceivable—I do not say it is probable—that the Free State may, even at this late hour, see the grave errors they have committed, and try to rectify them. The noble Earl says there are no Papers, therefore I ask leave to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.