Letters and Papers Concerning the Trans-Persian Railway and Other Railways in Persia [‎216r] (431/442)

701
Irish Creameries Bill. [ 24 July 1912] The Government's Land Policy. 702
delayed for a few days so as to give us
ampler opportunity of going into the
merits of the question. For some reason
best known to the parties another decision
has been arrived at, and the Bill comes on
again this evening. We remain of opinion ;
that my noble friend who moved this
Amendment was able to show a strong
case in favour of it. He was able to tell
the House that agricultural opinion in
Ireland, and not only agricultural opinion
but official opinion in Ireland, is solid in
favour of the omission of this proviso,
which if it were allowed to remain in the
Bill would, in the opinion of those con
cerned in the creamery industry, open a
door to serious abuse. That is the prima
facie view of the case and it appeals very
strongly to me. The noble Lord opposite
is able to suggest that there may be hard
cases on the other side. That is possibly
so. But in the meantime I am inclined
to think that, having regard to the great
weight of opinion behind my noble friend’s
Amendment, the better course will be to
delete the proviso. That will not at all
prevent the further consideration of the
point, and we shall all, I have no doubt,
be well pleased if some compromise which
will meet the views of both parties is arrived
at before the Bill becomes law.
Lord PLUNKET : I should like to say
that the Irish Agricultural Organisation
Society fully appreciates that the Board
of Trade may have an excellent case, but
this proviso has been drawn up in a way
which cannot satisfy Irish creameries.
The noble Lord opposite stated that the
Bill was agreed to by practically all parties
in Ireland. It is agreed to generally by
all parties, but not with this proviso.
There is not one single co-operative
creamery that we have heard from—and
we have heard from a great many—which
is not opposed to this proviso. We are
most ready to work with the Board of
Trade in this matter if we can, and if the
proviso is deleted now we hope that before
the Bill comes up for Second Reading in
another place we may be able to find some
way out of the difficulty which will satisfy
all parties.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Bill to be read 3 a To-morrow, and to be
printed as amended. (No. 131.)
(D 380) B
THE GOVERNMENT’S LAND POLICY.
The Earl of CAMPERDOWN rose to
call attention to a statement attributed
to Mr. Outhwaite, M.P., at Crewe on
July 22 at a Liberal meeting, that Mr.
Lloyd George, with the support of the
Prime Minister, will embark this autumn
on a great campaign which is to be con
tinued right up to the next General Election,
“ to do something for the overthrow of the
land monopoly ” ; and to ask whether
there is any foundation for Mr. Outhwaite’s
statement; and, if so, whether it correctly
represents the intentions of His Majesty’s
Government.
The noble Earl said : Your Lordships
probably noticed in The Times a report of
the speech by Mr. Outhwaite at a Liberal
meeting in Crewe, where a by-election is
now pending, in which he made the state
ment contained in my Notice. That
statement is a very open and clear state
ment. Mr. Outhwaite used the words
“ Mr. Lloyd George, with the support of
the Prime Minister.” That is equivalent
to the Government, because these two
Ministers cannot be regarded as independent
members of the House of Commons.
According to Mr. Outhwaite there is to be
“ a great campaign to do something for
the overthrow of the land monopoly.”
When I read this I could not help con
trasting it with the speech which we
heard on Monday from the noble Marquess
the Leader of the House, who I regret is
not in his place to-day. On that occasion
the noble Marquess was asked for some
information with regard to the so-called
unofficial Committee, and he said he
could give none. He was asked for the
names of the members of that Committee,
and he said he could not give them. He
then proceeded to belittle by all the
language in his power the effect of that
Committee and to explain to your Lord-
ships that we must not take the matter
seriously, that it was not a thing which
proceeded from the Government but was
entirely unofficial. In fact, the language
in which he indulged would have done
credit to the Delphic oracle from the point
of view of mysteriousness and uncertainty.
He only told us one thing—namely, that
he is not a Single Taxer.
The noble Marquess then went on to
very much depreciate the value of that
statement by finding fault with Lord
Ribblesdale for having spoken of a “ new