§ 47. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister whether he has noted the official proposal made by Field Marshal Montgomery that a committee should be appointed to consider the reorganisation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation structure; what representations have been made to the United Kingdom Government on this matter; and whether he will make a statement.
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman presumably refers to the reports of a speech made by the Field Marshal at a luncheon of the International Press Institute. No representations on this matter have been made to Her Majesty's Government.
Field Marshal Montgomery is, of course, responsible to N.A.T.O. and not to Her Majesty's Government.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs it wise that this unofficial statement should be made by someone who is, I believe, the Deputy Supreme Commander at S.H.A.P.E., and, therefore, is at any rate indirectly responsible to the United Kingdom Government? Would it not be better to have an official statement by the United Kingdom Government about the need for the reorganisation of the N.A.T.O. structure?
§ The Prime MinisterI have already said that N.A.T.O. and S.H.A.P.E. are international organisations and we do not control them nor do we regulate any statements that may be made by responsible officers of those bodies. I do not want it to be thought that I am embarking on any criticism of Field Marshal Montgomery. I think he is entitled to express his opinion, and if I am not expressing my own opinion on the subject it is not because I disagree with him, but because I will not be responsible if I have not the proper authority.
§ Mr. ShinwellAs this is a matter of some importance and affects our conception on Western defence, could we ascertain whether the United Kingdom Government have any views on the need or the alleged need for the reorganisation of the N.A.T.O. structure? Has this matter been considered by the Government?
§ The Prime MinisterWe pay close and lively attention to current events as they are reported in the newspapers.
§ 48. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the absence of detailed information in the White Paper on the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, he will furnish information on the total North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and national strength, respectively.
§ The Prime MinisterThe disclosure of information as regards the forces at the disposal of the North Atlantic Council is a matter for that body. At its recent meeting in Paris the Council decided to confine itself to what is said in the second paragraph of the communiqué issued on 20th April. It would clearly be inappropriate for a member Government to make available more detailed information than that agreed upon by the Council.
§ Mr. ShinwellAs we find it very difficult to obtain any detailed information about what is going on, is it not the duty of the right hon. Gentleman not to try to evade Questions put to him, as he did the previous Question, but to face up to them and give us some information? How are we to get the information otherwise? We ask a Question and there are evasive answers or reticence on the part of the right hon. Gentleman. What are we to do? Are we to go to Paris and ask the questions?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman was one of the architects of N.A.T.O., and if he chooses to go to Paris and address that body or any representatives with whom he could come in contact no objection would be taken.
§ Mr. ShinwellPerhaps the right hon. Gentleman will accompany me when I go. May I ask him whether he recalls that when he sat on this side of the House and we sat on the Government side he was constantly asking for information of a detailed character, and when we occasionally said that in the interests of 1699 security it was not desirable to give it he said, "Why do you always claim that it is in the public interest not to divulge information"? What is the position now? Has he changed his outlook on these matters?
§ The Prime MinisterIt seems to be uncommonly like the position of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. BellengerWould the Prime Minister not give serious consideration to this Question which does not concern my right hon. Friend alone but others? Is he aware that United States Congressmen are much better informed on these affairs than are Members of the House of Commons? Are we not entitled to more information than we have already received?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the comparison between the amount of information enjoyed by the members of the United States Congress and that enjoyed by Members of the House of Commons would be a delicate and difficult matter to discuss, especially at the present time.
§ Mr. AttleeSeeing that we are one of the principal partners in N.A.T.O. could not our representatives take up this matter in order that we could get rather fuller information? I understand the position of the right hon. Gentleman from the point of view of the Government, but, after all, we are partners in this great organisation and we ought to know as much as is given to other nations.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir, I certainly think we should know as much as is given to other nations, and we should not hesitate to publish anything that has been published if it is found to be correct. At the present time I do not seek to make a statement in detail upon this matter, though I entirely agree that Parliament must be kept informed, as far as the public interest allows, of the general progress of our rearmament under N.A.T.O.