Is it not amazing, when the British do try to commit this highway robbery we are told about, that the Government here have not devised some practical way of retaliating? For instance, if we were to shake Deputy Cleary at them he might not, perhaps, be very effective as a weapon, but I should think that it would be almost the greatest insult we could hurl at them. Now, what about the economies of all this?
Do I understand the great fear that is hitting the Minister on this occasion is that postal communication between the two islands might be cut off or might be interrupted? Why do we want postal communication between the two islands? We do not want the British for business purposes, I understand. Surely the Minister is not providing for the passage of letters and mails merely on social matters? We do not want any sort of business as between this country and Great Britain; the British market is gone, thank God for it, we are told. If we have nothing to write letters about I do not suppose Deputy Cleary is going to write letters bemoaning that! Why do we want to get letters from Britain? Why does the Minister want to get them? Why are those letters to be passing backward and forward? Is it not possible to do something manly, if stupid, like stopping our letters to them? We have done it with our cattle; we might as well do it with our letters. Why cannot something really blatantly stupid like that be done? This is a microscopic provision which shows up the arrogant stupidity of all the other things. When we are stupid in the big things why not be stupid in the details? Is there any way we could do something, like shaking Deputy Cleary, to scare them out of their skins? We have a Minister here who has avowed himself an adept at teeth slapping. Why not send his over? We have another Minister who has—I suppose by way of competition— avowed himself an adept at faceslapping. Why cannot he be sent over? Why cannot the President write a "Dear Mr. Thomas" letter like he did when he wanted to know what would happen if he declared a Republic? "Dear Mr. Thomas, We never believed you would be ignorant enough"—as Deputy Cleary would say—"to get your own back on us if we tried to do something dirty on you, and we are ashamed of your conduct. We should have asked you, before we did anything to rile you, what you would do in certain eventualities. Let us now forget what happened, and let us know what you are going to do if this continues in the future." Next year, are we to make provision for another £53,000? Is this what I might call only the fruits of one year's milking—this loss of £53,000? Is this only one year we are answering for?
