asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will state, with regard to the requests or representations as to information about or discussions on matters likely to arise at Ottawa stated to have been made to the British Government by the High Commissioner, (a) if the High Commissioner suggested discussion on any occasion since April 20th, and, if so, how often and with what result; and (b) if the High Commissioner requested information on any occasion since April 20th, and, if so, how often and with what result.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Ottawa Conference.
The information sought for by the Deputy relates to communication between this Government and another Government. The giving of such precise details as the Deputy requires concerning the actions of a particular civil servant in relation to such communications could hardly serve the general interests of the State or the efficient working of the Department of External Affairs. The Deputy will have to be satisfied with the information that no change has taken place in the situation described in my answer to his question of the 25th May relating to the same subject.
I did not ask any question about what a civil servant may have done. My previous question, to which this question is really supplemental, as requested by the Vice-President, related to requests made on behalf of the Free State Government and reference to a civil servant did not enter into it at all. I am asking now with regard to the High Commissioner on behalf of the Free State Government; I am asking as to whether or not certain requests were made since 20th April. I have not got an answer and I would like to have an answer.
I have not a copy of the reply then given to the Deputy, but I saw it before it was given to the Vice-President, and it seemed to me completely to cover the grounds set out in the Deputy's question. It certainly embodied all the information at our disposal or that we thought it necessary to give.
To take one part of my question, I have asked whether or not discussions were suggested on any occasion since 20th April and no answer has been returned to that.
As I have indicated, I have not the last day's reply. So far as I know, a long list of the dates on which communications took place from January to 18th April was the foundation of that reply. I think the reply covered all these points. It indicated in general terms that in January there were communications.
That was not stated in any reply to me up to date; there was no statement as to communications made. I hope the Vice-President will corroborate that.
The reply on the last occasion—I have just received it—was as follows:
No exchange of views has taken place between the Saorstát and British Governments on the questions which might come up for discussion at Ottawa. We understand that our position in this respect is not different from that of at least two other States of the Commonwealth. The High Commissioner asked for information or suggested discussion on five distinct occasions between the beginning of January and the middle of the present month. He received certain documents relating to the trade between these two countries on the 18th April. Further information was promised. It must be remembered, however, that the agenda for the Conference was not circulated by the Canadian Government until yesterday, and without the agenda discussions could hardly be expected to yield concrete results.
I asked for information as to the occasions upon which discussion was suggested. That was the only point about which I was concerned and it was the only point to which a reply was relevant. The rest was pure irrelevancy. The Vice-President asked me to put down a question for some day when the President would be here, as he was not so familiar with the details. I have now asked if the High Commissioner suggested discussion on any occasion since April 20th, and, if so, how often and with what result.
I have given to the Deputy the only reply I have.
In the circumstances, I intend to raise this matter on the motion for the adjournment.
The Deputy set a very good headline on a previous occasion and I intend to follow it.
Will the President be a little more precise as to what he means?
I do not intend to discuss this matter any further.
May I point out that the discussion will go on equally well whether the President is here or not?