Supplementary questions in the House of Commons are a useful,
but also a dangerous, institution. That was rather disturbingly exemplified on Friday of last week when, in the course of interrogations about Russia, Mr. Gallacher asked the Prime Minister whether he would not make per- sonal contact in order to get Stalin's own view, and Mr. Chamberlain drew ill-timed Ministerial cheers by reply- ing : " Perhaps the Hon. Member will suggest whom I should make personal contact with, because personalities change rather rapidly." There is no need to be hyper- critical about a reply thrown off on the spur of the moment, but actually it could not have been more unfortunately put. For in the conduct of foreign affairs in Russia there has been remarkable continuity. The effective head of the State there has been the effective head since 1924 ; in that period there have been six different administrations in this country. Russia had the same Foreign Minister from 193o to May, 1939 ; in that period we have had half a dozen. The pleasantry about changing personalities falls a little flat in such circumstances. Whether a slight score off Moscow is desirable at any time is arguable ; if so, it ought at least to be a score that comes off.
Previous page
