asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, consequent upon the exchange of ambassadors with Soviet Russia, it is now proposed, in the case of applicants for passports desiring to proceed to Russia, to withdraw the general warning that such applicants enter the territories of the Soviet Union at their own risk?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if it is now proposed to withdraw the prohibitive notice hitherto tendered to business men and others who contemplated visiting Russia, in view of the resumption of diplomatic relations with the Union of Soviet Republics?

As a result of the resumption of full diplomatic relations with the Government of the Soviet Union, instructions have been issued to the effect that the passports of British subjects desiring to proceed to the Union can now be endorsed for that country: the prohibitive notice in question has been withdrawn.

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman has satisfied himself that people will be able to enter Russia with perfect liberty and freedom and without the apprehension of any harm coming to them?

May I ask whether there is in the records of the Foreign Office any instance of any business man who has gone there who has not come through with perfect safety to himself?

May I ask for a reply to my question?

I do not think there is anything to reply to.

Perhaps I may put it in another way. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable apprehension, having regard to things that have taken place in Russia, and has he satisfied himself—

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, I would like to ask him if it is not the case that the relations between us and Russia never were more friendly than they are to-day? Next question?

May I ask for a reply-to my question?

Answer!

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is now satisfied that the Soviet Ambassador and Soviet Government put the same interpretation as His Majesty's Government on the mutual agreement concerning propaganda; and if there has been, as a result, any definite improvement in this respect?

With regard to the first part of the question I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison) on the 23rd December. With regard to the second part of the question, it is too early as yet to form any conclusion as to the definite effect of the agreement concluded about propaganda.

I should, however, add that, although His Majesty's Government are not without hope that the agreement recently entered into will result in a permanent improvement, a message from the Third International, which appeared in a daily paper on the 1st January, led me to inform the Soviet Ambassador that such action was calculated to impede that improvement in the relations, between the two countries which the impending negotiations had as their object. For the present His Majesty's Government do not propose to take further action.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what connection there is between the Third International and the "Daily Worker"?

I am afraid I cannot.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state whether the Soviet Ambassador agreed with the suggestion made by him that they were responsible for the activities of the Comintern, as shown in the periodical which he quotes?

No, I have not asked him that question.

Has any answer been given on behalf of the Soviet Government to the right hon. Gentleman's stern reprimand?

No; I did not give a stern reprimand.

Was there any answer?

May we know if any answer was given?

How many supplementaries is the hon. Member to get?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Dominions have expressed satisfaction with the declarations regarding propaganda in their territories made by the Soviet Government?

I have been asked to reply. The notes exchanged with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics regarding the applicability to the Dominions of the undertakings in respect of propaganda were framed after consultation with His Majesty's Governments in the Dominions.

Will the hon. Gentleman arrange to have this correspondence published?

That question has been put on a number of occasions and the answer was given on 6th, 11th and 19th November. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman looks in the records, he will find that we have no intention of publishing the correspondence.

Can the hon. Gentleman, when he says that this was done after consultation, say whether the Dominions approved of it or not?

The Dominion Governments were not asked to express satisfaction or otherwise.

Did they?

Does the hon. Gentleman approve of secret diplomacy?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what arrangements have been made for housing the British Ambassador in Moscow?

The Embassy offices and clerical staff are at present housed in a building taken by His Majesty's Government on a lease expiring annually and renewable on the 31st July next. The Ambassador and his diplomatic staff are at present living in the Savoy Hotel. Negotiations for a suitable residence and office accommodation are now in progress.

In the interval, is special care being taken of the records of the British Government?

Is it not a fact that the diplomat and his staff in Moscow are extremely comfortable?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the British Ambassador is satisfied with his present position in the matter of housing?

rose—

Mr. Cocks.