I wish to say a few words in support of the plea put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Sir R. Hamilton) in reference to the pensions of Colonial officials whose time has to be reckoned in several Colonies. I, myself, am in receipt of two Colonial pensions, and I labour under no disadvantage; the Colonial Office have already remedied the grievance of break of service with reference to Governors and some higher officials. Therefore, it is but a step to establish the same adjustments for the junior members of the service. The point an which I labour under a. great disadvantage is that having worked for 40 years in the overseas Empire, my experience is likely to make my views unwelcome to the younger school of thought on the Treasury Bench.

A few days ago a question was asked in this House regarding Bolshevik propaganda m the Crown Colonies. I can assure this House, from personal experience, that the apprehensions as to the dangers of such propaganda are well-founded; and I view with great apprehension the light-heartedness with which anti-British propaganda is held by those who should be more jealous custodians of the British Empire's trade and prosperity and of attacks against British prestige in every corner of the world. Recently a great meeting was held in the Albert Hall to consider what steps should be taken to check anti-British propaganda in this country and then more than 100 Conservative Members supported that request for stronger action. I hope 100 more hon. Members from the Labour side will be added to the 100 Conservatives in support of the view I am submitting to this House, the view that the supineness and the shortsightedness of the policy adopted by the Colonial 'Office in dealing with Communistic or Fascistic propaganda in our Colonies calls for the turning over of a new leaf. It ought to receive more attention than it is receiving at present. The obvious antidote to this kind of propaganda is British counter-propaganda. Nevertheless, it is a remarkable and regrettable fact that such counter-propaganda has not been initiated by Imperial officials. What is worse it is not being encouraged, and in parts of the Empire which are under the influence and control of the Colonial Office it is being discouraged and our prospective enemies are comforted.

We remember the parallel of Ireland, where systematic propaganda against everything British was ignored for years and the enemies of everything English were pandered to, with the result that Ireland is no longer a part of the United Kingdom. This criticism of responsibility of right hon. Gentlemen opposite, which requires circumspection whenever there is an approach to a reference to a fully self-governing Dominion such as Ireland, but there are other portions of the Empire that are not fully self-governing, and there are other portions of the Empire which are described as being administered under a diarchical system. With reference to Ministerial responsibility in this House under that system, there are important constitutional questions which desire to be cleared up in this House by reference to practical experience in the working of constitutions, diarchical and otherwise. We had a brilliant and commendable example set in this House by the Under-Secretary of State for India when introducing the Indian Estimates, in so far as he not only gave, but offered, a wide scope in this House for the discussion of certain questions under the Government of India notwithstanding that India is a diarchy. It is necessary that there should be a line of demarcation between the subjects which are reserved and those which are not. It is equally obvious that if there are portions of the Empire which are not fully self-governing, they must, be treated as diarchical, and the Colonial Office must be responsible to this House for all or any of the reserved subjects.

The Speaker of the Northern Parliament of Ireland and three other Members of that Parliament sit in this House; they are not thereby precluded from giving their attention to the affairs of every portion of the Empire where there has been lack of efficient control by responsible Ministers in this House provided such subjects are "reserved "to the paramount Parliament. The recent ruling of Mr. Speaker on a point raised by the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) threw a new and important flood of light upon the constitutional position when reserved subjects are discussed. I understood Mr. Speaker to say that the point, whether a question was a "reserved subject" or not was not always a matter for the Speaker to decide, it had often to be decided by the responsible Minister of the Crown, and should not be left to the Speaker who may not have the material information necessary to decide. As a further important point, and a fundamental constitutional question—may I submit as one who has studied the constitutional questions almost uninterruptedly for 40 years that such responsibility rests necessarily on the Minister responsible to the Crown.