Chairman.

1. You are here as Secretary of the Empire Parliamentary Association, the body which, in the first instance, took steps some time ago to have this question of better accommodation dealt with; I think you might now proceed at once to put your case before the Committee?—The case of the Empire Parliamentary Association was more or less shown in the memorandum, which I think the Members of the Committee have before them, signed by the Leaders of all Parties. There are one or two points which I should like to develop on that if the Committee will allow me, particularly in view of the fact that the accommodation already for Members in the House is insufficient. Therefore I would ask the Committee in the first instance to regard this question as a large question of Imperial policy, and that if it should, which I do not think it will, involve any inconvenience to Members, even then it would be worth doing. I am, I think, in rather a peculiar position to judge of the difficult position which we have now reached in the constitutional relations of the self-governing countries of the British Empire. We have got here the Centre Parliament and Government practically deciding the great issues of foreign policy, defence, and other questions vitally affecting all nations of the British Commonwealth. The self-governing Dominions are now in the position of having obtained nationhood, and they are represented at the League of Nations and the Imperial Cabinet; and many of the Members of Parliament in those nations think that the Parliament overseas should decide questions of (11290)

the

foreign policy for themselves, some even going so far as suggesting having their own diplomatic representatives, and others openly for separation from the British Empire. In the rooms of the Association at Westminster Hall I receive these Members of all Parties, and all kinds of opinion, and the importance that I want to emphasise to the Committee is to identify all those Members with the Parliament at Westminster and make them feel as if they were part of the Commonwealth of Parliaments and part of the machine that is working the British Empire. For instance, Nationalists of South Africa have come over here and have been received here, Nationalists who are practically opposed to the existence of the British Empire, some being Republicans. They have gone back, I have been told by their colleagues, with an entirely different point of view. They have seen that they have been received here as part of the Commonwealth of Nations, and receiving privileges, which is the point I want to emphasise, as members of the family more numerous and important than are granted to foreign countries. Those are the general observations I wanted to make on the matter at the present time, especially when all these young Nations feeling their feet as young Nations and wanting to decide questions of imperial and foreign policy sometimes. for themselves.

are

One direction in which I have found a very great difficulty in connection with the work of receiving these Members is getting room to hear Debates in the Mother of Parliaments where questions of vital importance to those Dominions and to their future

B

4 July 1923]

are discussed and decided. I am speaking of the House of Commons at the moment; I have not had the same difficulty in the House of Lords, because the card which is issued under the authority of the Usher of the Black Rod entitles a Member of a Dominion Parliament to the same privilege that is given to a Member of the House of Commons that is to say, he can go to the Bar of the House of Lords, and therefore, when there is a debate there, he does not find any difficulty. I think perhaps Members may not have seen this card; probably some of them have; I will just circu late one which happens to be, you see, the card of a man who has not taken it up on account of illness. (The card was handed.) That is the card of the House of Lords. In the House of Commons the arrangement has been (and I think perhaps I had better mention this) up to the present that I should issue a card to the visitor which asks the Serjeant-at-Arms' department to issue a card in his favour which is signed by the Speaker and the Serjeant-at-Arms admitting him to the Members' Lobby, the Strangers' Dining Room, the Strangers' Smoking Room, and the Members' Library from 10 to 1, which is a privilege that has recently been extended, on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, and the Terrace, and (and this is the point which I have particularly to deal with) the Special Gallery as far as accommodation admits. Generally speaking, Mr. Erskine, who I may say has done everything possible to assist the work of the Association, and is always ready to help under difficult circumstances, I admit, on account of the smallness of the Gallery, has always endeavoured to keep at least two places; sometimes I think I have had three. Of course, I am talking about important Debates; on ordinary occasions possibly the Special Gallery may be not very full, and a Member may be able to go in on presentation of this card; but on important occasions two has been, generally speaking, I think, the number that I have had, and perhaps one in the Distinguished Strangers' Gallery which Colonel Verney has kindly supplied me with. Of course, when you have regard to the number of visiting Members of Parliament that are over here from the Dominions at any one time, varying, of course,

the

[Continued

according to whether their Houses are in Session or whether they are not, it is sometimes quite considerable. This year it has not been quite so considerable as before for one or two reasons; I think all Overseas Parliaments have been sitting during June; they generally rise at the end of March or April. The Canadian Parliament has only just risen two days ago; therefore, we have had practically no Canadian Members this Session, but most other Sessions (I was looking back at back at the cards that have been issued) they have been somewhere about 40, and in one case there were 50. I think in 1920 there were 44, in 1921 there were 54, in 1922 there were 40, and up to the present in the present Session there have been only 24.

5. Only 24 in all since February ?— Yes. That is, as I say, owing largely to the fact that some of the Parliaments are still sitting, and the Canadian Parliament has been sitting up till about two days ago. In practice on important occasions I have not had more than two seats guaranteed, and in one or two cases it has not been possible even to get those. What I want to emphasise particularly on this is the desirability of making those Members of Parliament who are, of course, unanimously against any Imperial Parliament-they do not want to be represented in an Imperial Parliament here--feel, even some of them almost against their will, as if they were part of the British Commonwealth, and to receive some special privilege, (which to a certain extent they have had through that card and have very highly appreciated, I may say), above and beyond those which are granted to foreign countries and foreign representatives. Of course, I am only at the moment dealing with those Parliaments which have Domin

4 July 1923]

ion status, that is to say, that are really responsible self-governing nations. We have been pressed very much in the Association-it has been before us on several occasions on the question of the admission of other Parliaments that have not actually Dominion status for instance, those very nearly or bordering upon Dominion status; one or two of the Parliaments of the West Indies, the Parliament of Malta, and, undoubtedly it will have to be considered, the position of the Irish Free State Parliament. We have had already tentative suggestions made to us regarding the last named, but, of course, nothing can be done at present. Still, there are other Parliaments almost occupying Dominion status like India, which will have to be considered sooner or later. It is often of great political importance to them, not only to hear the Debates, but also to follow the procedure in the House of Commons.

I think I ought to say a word, as it is mentioned in the memorandum, regarding the position of the High Commissioners, which, perhaps, it is more particularly the place of Mr. Ormsby Gore to deal with, but I think I ought to mention that the present system is, unless the Committee know of it, that five seats are kept in the Special Gallery for the High Commismissioners up till 3.30, and I think it has recently been offered to extend that time until 4. That is in the second row, of course, the Special Gallery being one row behind the Distinguished Strangers. The High Commissioners have placed officially (I think Mr. Larkin is dealing with it for the whole of the High Commissioners) before the Colonial Office their desire that they should be treated in a way corresponding, at any rate, to the position of Ambassadors, the Ambassadors' Gallery being a row in front. There are five seats there available, I understand, for Ambassadors and Ministers alike, and therefore the High Commissioner, for example, for Canada, has been in the position-perhaps on occasion where he may not have given notice, as on big occasions he has to do, before 3.30, if he is coming—that he has possibly got into the Gallery and has seen a Minister who has not given any notice come in in front of him and take a position in the Ambassadors' Gallery. He is representing 10,000,000

(11290)

an

[Continued.

people, talking about the Canadian High Commissioner, and a country in which could be put several of the small European countries several times over, and he feels that at least he should have a position in the front row, and that he should be in equally as good a position as an Ambassador of a foreign country or a Minister of one of the smaller States. I should submit that the High Commissioners ought to be treated as members of the family, often having to go to the League of Nations meetings with our own Ministers and to attend important conferences dealing with foreign affairs, and it is very important for them to hear what is going on in the House of Commons. They should be treated at least equally with the Ambassadors.

I do not know whether I can deal with the present suggestions that are likely to be made to the Committee, or whether I should wait until the evidence has been given by the Assistant Serjeant-at-Arms and the Speaker's Secretary as to whether that meets the case or not. I do not know what you would desire on that head. I have been in consultation with Mr. Erskine and Colonel Verney, and I know the proposals that are to be made, and therefore I think it would be shorter if I were to deal with them now.

Chairman.

6. I think it would be better to have these particulars submitted and supported by Mr. Erskine, after which you might make any further statement. ?—Yes. I should just like to say this before I conclude, that one of the High Commissioners (we are speaking in private here and there is no report made in the Press of the proceedings of the Committee) said to me that under no circumstances would he come near the House of Commons under the present conditions, because he felt that the position of the High Commissioners was not recognised as in the case of a foreign country.

I should have one or two observations to make on the proposals. I do not know whether there is anything else I can say on this.

Chairman.

7. As to the first part of your evi dence, before Mr. Erskine is heard I think members of the Committe might like to put questions.

B2

4 July 1923]

Major Cadogan.

Do you observe any claim of precedence with regard to High Commissioners? I remember in the case of foreign Ministers, I think I am right in saying in the Ambassadors' Gallery, when Ambassadors came in Ministers had to give way to them?I believe it was so. I do not think it is carried through now, but Mr. Erskine would be able to answer that question, or Mr. Speaker's Secretary.

were

9. You do not regard any precedence with regard to High Commissioners ?—Their seats always kept in the Special Gallery up till 3.30 every day, and I think there was an offer made recently to extend that until 4 o'clock, but that is all. They are always in the second row there, and they see the Minister perhaps of Latvia come along and take a seat in the Ambassadors' Gallery which is kept open always. No seats in the Ambassadors' Gallery are ever given to anyone but Ambassadors or Ministers. Those seats are always kept open. Supposing a High Commissioner should come down at 4 o'clock, he might find no seat available at all; therefore he is not in as good a position.

Mr. Snowden.

10. And he might see the Ambassadors' Gallery empty?-He might see the Ambassadors' Gallery absolutely empty; in fact that has happened on more than one occasion. A High Commissioner has come down; there was no room at all, while there was room in the Ambassadors' Gallery. I remember on one occasion the High Commissioner sending in a note to the Prime Minister, then Mr. Lloyd George, and Mr. Lloyd George, I think, approached the Speaker and he was put in the Ambassadors' Gallery on that particular occasion.

Major Cadogan.

11. How many High Commissioners are there?-There are five, but of course you cannot judge by their attendances recently, because one or two of them will not come down under the present conditions-one at least, and I think two. Then one has not been appointed for the last eight months-the High Commissioner for Newfoundland. Therefore, there are three out of the five that are really out of the reckoning on the present basis. But of course we have to consider another point that I

[Continued.

was going to raise when Mr. Erskine had given his evidence, which I might mention now, that we have two High Commissioners in the offing, as it were, the High Commissioner for the Irish Free State and the High Commissioner for India. When they realise their position they will probably say they must have exactly the same position as the other High Commissioners; that makes seven instead of five.

Chairman.

12. The Irish Free State Commissioner is actually here.-He is actually here, and so is the Indian High Commissioner, but of course the Indian High Commissioner is not quite in the same position, because India is not exactly a self-governing Dominion although she is represented at the League of Nations.

Colonel Sir Martin Archer-Shee. 13. What objection would there be to the High Commissioners being allowed to have the same privileges as the Ambassadors, that is to say, having that Gallery kept for Ambassadors and High Commissioners ?You mean, the Gallery that is suggested by the Serjeant-at-Arms.

14. The existing front row is kept as you said for Ambassadors and Ministers only? Yes.

15. What arguments are there against opening that to High Commissioners as well as Ambassadors ?I think there are two answers to that. One is that I think on the broader question it is undesirable to put the High Commissioners in exactly the same position as a foreign Ambassador, because it is only helping to emphasise that they are in the same position as foreigners. We want to do something to make them feel that they are part of the Commonwealth; to give them as good but a different position. That is one answer I think, and the other answer is that they would never find any room on big occasions, which is really what we have to consider. The Ambassadors or Ministers would always be there, and therefore they would have no room. There are only five seats for all the Ambassadors, and it is not very much.

Major Cadogan.

16. They are always full, I suppose, on big occasions? Yes. I think the German Ambassador could not find a seat the other day.