Coll 29/86 'Diplomatic and consular expenditure: incidence; revision; general' [‎105r] (209/561)

7 4 Ti B
500 3.32
Paper. Record Depar
r r 7T * '
imeri£-(Partiamentary Branch).
Transferred to Secretary, Political Dept.
t
p 40.61 1958 193 .
Extract from Official Report of the
? e AUG 195U
Date
jjii'J-lDjjxLxI. o SE-liiijX Derates.
, pa#e /oS'#'- lo&o
m
Incidence of Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. Expenditure.
513. *Mr. S. Satyamurti : Will the Secretary for External Affairs
se state :
(a) whether Government are aware that since 1929-30 the Public
Accounts Committee have been asking that the question
oi the incidence of Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. expenditure should he
considered ;
(b) the reasons for the delay on the part of Government in
settling this question ;
(c) whether Government have represented, or propose to repre
sent to the British Government that Indian interests in the
Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. are very small and that the entire expendi
ture should be borne by His Majesty’s Government ; and
(d) if not, why not ?
Sir Aubrey Metcalfe : (a) Yes.
(b) A settlement in which two parties are involved cannot be
decided by unilaterial action on the part of one party to the settlement.
The ai rangements for division of expenditure in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. are
at present regulated by a Convention arrived at between His Majesty’s
Government and the Government of India in 1904 and this Convention
cannot be altered without the consent of both parties.
(c) No. The Government of India do not admit that Indian
interests in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. are negligible.
(d) Does not arise.
Mr. S. Satyamurti : With reference to part (b), may I know
whether the answer means that while this Government have been
doing their best, the delay of nearly eight years after the Public
Accounts Committee has made its recommendation is entirely due to
His Majesty’s Government’s unwillingness to come to any settlement
in this matter ?
Sir Aubrey Metcalfe : That, I think, asks me for an expression of
opinion. It is not for me to apportion blame between His Majesty’s
Government and the Government of India.
Mr. S. Satyamurti : I want to know the facts. I want to know
the reasons for the delay and whether the Government of India have
been doing their best, or whether they themselves acquiesce in this
delay by not pressing the question adequately on the attention of His
Majesty’s Government ?
Sir Aubrey Metcalfe : Whether the Government of India are press
ing the matter adequately or not is surely a matter of opinion.
Mr. S. Satyamurti : I want to know what the Government of India
are doing ? I ha\e not asked for their opinion : I am asking whether
the Go\ernment of India have pressed, with all the pressure which they
must exercise in ^ iew of the fact that the Public Accounts Committee
of eight years have been pressing again and again upon the Govern
ment whether they are pressing this on His Majesty’s Government
with all the force at their disposal ?
Sir Aubrey Metcalfe : I cannot say more except that there has
been and still is correspondence going on with His Majestv’s Govern
ment on the matter.
For informati
Mr. S. Satyamurti : Have the Government of India pointed out to
His Majesty’s Government that the Indian Legislature is impatient iu
the matter in view of the fact that the matter has been pending for
over eight vears ?
_____ P T S.
W. T. OTTEWILL.
NOTE.— A copy has also been referred to ‘‘'inaiic* d ii0OE®l8K|P. e F artInent - ^ ^' e subject-
matter does not concern the Departmeirf, it is requested that this reference may be returned
immediately to the Parliamentary Branch.