§ 2.46 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they recognise the validity of the Suez Canal Convention of 1888 and propose to consult the present representatives of the signatories as to the matters now at issue with the Egyptian Government.]
THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF READING)My Lords, the answer to the first part of the noble Viscount's Question is, Yes. As regards the second part of the Question, Her Majesty's Government have already been in consultation with the French and United States Governments, with the other Commonwealth Governments and with other friendly Governments. As consultations continue, I regret that I can say no more at this stage.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble Marquess for his most satisfactory reply. Of course, the noble Marquess will realise that the Question is whether all signatories to the Convention are to be consulted. I hope the noble Marquess will not restrain me from raising that point in the debate this afternoon.
THE MARQUESS OF READINGMy Lords, I quite understand the object of the noble Viscount's Question and of course it is open to be argued in the debate that as many signatories as he may wish should be consulted.
LORD REAMy Lords, may I ask the noble Viscount whether he would include the succession States of Austria and Hungary as signatories to the Convention?
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, there are, of course, endless succession States, but the noble Lord the Leader of the Liberal Party will know that I am referring to the succession States of Imperial Russia.