asked the President if, having regard to paragraph (3) of the despatch of 6th July, 1932, received by him from the British Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs (P. No. 829), he still adheres to his statement made in the Dáil on the 19th October, 1932, that as regards arbitration the British Government had signified its readiness to arbitrate on the question of the land annuities provided the tribunal was of the character outlined in the 1930 Imperial Conference Report.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Proposed Land Annuities Arbitration.
The passage in my speech of October 19th cited by the Deputy referred to the original attitude of the British Government on the question of arbitration. The despatch of July 6th indicated no change except in detail; the British Government still adhered, and, so far as we are aware, still adheres, to its refusal to refer the dispute to a freely chosen tribunal.
I have asked if, having regard to a certain paragraph in the despatch of 6th July last, the President still adheres to the Statement he made in the Dáil. That statement was that the British Government had signified its readiness to arbitrate on the question of the land annuities provided the tribunal was of the character outlined in the 1930 Imperial Conference Report. The despatch says:
The form of tribunal which His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have proposed was that recommended at the Imperial Conference of 1930 and, for that reason, this form of tribunal still seems to them to be the most appropriate. Nevertheless, they are ready, in order to arrive at an amicable settlement, to consider any variation in the form of tribunal which His Majesty's Government in the Irish Free State may wish to suggest, so long as its members are drawn from within the British Commonwealth.
Has there not been a change?
There has been no change in the character of the tribunal.
I should like to know if the Vice-President would still consider it inaccurate to say that the British Government have signified their readiness to arbitrate provided the tribunal is of the character outlined in the 1930 Imperial Conference Report, despite what I have read from the despatch of the 6th July. Arising out of that, I asked previously, and was told to wait until the despatch was in my hands, if there is anything to prevent nationals of the Irish Free State being appointed as representatives or as nominees of the Government or, for that matter, if there is anything to prevent a Free State national being appointed as chairman of the tribunal.
There is nothing to prevent nationals of the Free State being appointed on any tribunal that might be agreed upon.
Will the Vice-President tell us what is the row about, then?