HL Deb 08 May 1958 vol 209 cc99-103

3.6 p.m.

VISCOUNT ELIBANK

My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, having regard to the fact (1) that on 28th April, 1953, they stated in this House that it would be reasonable to say that the restriction upon strategic goods which was put upon China as long as warlike activities were pursued in Korea cannot possibly be extended to any general overall peace plan stretching far and away beyond Korea, and that on 3rd February, 1954, they stated that the United Nations resolution of May, 1951, relating to the embargo on the export of strategic materials to China, was adopted in order to provide additional measures to be employed to meet aggression in Korea, and that its scope had not been widened so as to cause it to become operative in relation to hostilities in any other territories outside Korea and Korean waters; (2) that in the stated views of President Eisenhower and Sir Anthony Eden the war in Korea has ended; (3) that all United Kingdom troops have been withdrawn from Korea; (4) that so long as the China embargo continues, China is driven more and more for the capital goods necessary for her industrialisation plans to the Soviet bloc and non "Cocom" countries to the long-term disadvantage of British traders; and further, having regard to the urgent necessity of increasing the volume of British exports in world markets, Her Majesty's Government will initiate such steps as may be necessary to bring about the termination of the out-of-date China embargo.]

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF GOSFORD)

My Lords, as the noble Viscount has already been told both by myself and by other Ministers on the previous occasions on which he has asked similar Questions, although hostilities in Korea have indeed long since ceased, the objective of the United Nations has not yet been achieved. These controls are now under review by the Co-ordinating Committee in Paris, and I regret that I am unable to say anything further at present.

VISCOUNT ELIBANK

My Lords, I beg to thank the noble Earl. Is he aware that his reference to the objective of the United Nations is a red herring which was produced by the noble Marquess, Lord Reading, in an attempt to stymie me three years ago but did not do so? May I ask the noble Earl whether he is aware that the Democratic Party in California have come out in favour Of trade with China? Is he further aware that at some time or other the United States will herself take the initiative, if we do not, in removing the China embargo? And are we to wait until the United States chooses its own good time to remove the embargo and to launch a concentrated attack on the China market at the expense of British industrialists whom she has been hamstringing in their efforts to trade with China for the last half-a-dozen years?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

Indeed, I am fully aware of the three points on which the noble Viscount has commented. As to the last one, about American unilateral action, I am afraid I cannot in any way go along with the noble Viscount. The fifteen nations which comprise "Cocom" have freely entered into this agreement. America is one of them. I think they will go along together and that no decision will be taken by any of the countries without the other countries' agreement.

LORD PETHICK-LAWRENCE

My Lords, is it not about time that we called a spade a spade, and stated unequivocally that it is just silly nonsense to continue treating China as a naughty child and thereby driving her more and more into the arms of Russia?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, may I ask the noble Earl whether it is not a fact that many countries were forced to place this embargo upon China by the American threat to withdraw much of their aid at that time? To what extent does the threat to withdraw aid still apply, and how does it influence the position of Her Majesty's Government?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, again, I do not think that I can go along with the noble Lord. As I have said already, the agreement was entered into freely by the fifteen nations as the result of a United Nations Motion. I have also stated that these controls are now under review by the Committee in Paris, and it is hoped that their deliberations will come to a conclusion during the course of the first half of this year.

LORD HENDERSON

My Lords, with all respect to the Minister, he has not answered the essential part of the Quest ion addressed to him by my noble friend. The Question asks whether Her Majesty's Government will initiate such steps as may be necessary to bring about the termination of the out-of-date China embargo. It is true, as the Minister has told us, that there are fifteen nations involved in this agreement, but, as I have said before, the agreement will go on until one of the fifteen nations takes the initiative to get an agreement to end the embargo. What we are pressing upon Her Majesty's Government is that they should take the initiative with the other fourteen nations involved, to end the embargo.

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, it appears to me that I am getting a little repetitive. I have already stated that this matter is under active consideration in Paris at the moment, and our representative is there.

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

My Lords, what does a hack phrase like "under active consideration" mean? The noble Earl has been asked a plain question—will the British delegate suggest an end to this agreement? Can we have an answer to that?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

No.

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, may I, for the last time, ask whether there has to be unanimous agreement in this Committee before we can take away this embargo?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, my answer "No" meant that I did not intend to give an answer to the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, if he will forgive me. The answer to the question of the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, is that the Committee has to come to an agreement like any other Committee. I regret to say that I cannot give a definite reply to the question about unanimity, for fear that I mislead your Lordships, and I would prefer to have notice of it.

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

Yes, but this is a Parliamentary Question to which the noble Earl is replying. I do not know what he meant exactly by "No". I asked him whether our delegation would take certain steps, and he said, "No". Did he mean that they would not take steps, or that he did not want to answer me?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, I think the noble Viscount ended his remark by asking, could he have an answer? I said "No".

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

That is to say that the noble Earl, as representing the Foreign Office and standing for this policy of embargo, declines in this House to answer questions relating to the embargo.

VISCOUNT ELIBANK

My Lords, may I, with the permission of the House, ask the noble Earl whether he is aware that he has not given any answer to the Question whether Her Majesty's Government will take steps. The noble Earl has not given me any answer.

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

None whatever.

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government want to do as much trade as—

VISCOUNT STANSGATE,

America will let them!

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

—as is possible. These controls were put on for a strategic reason and that strategic reason still holds. Nevertheless, as have already said (and I cannot say which particular country, if any, initiated this review) these controls are now being reviewed in Paris. I am not in any position to say anything further, however many questions your Lordships like to ask.

LORD CHORLEY

My Lords, if the noble Earl means that Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to take the initiative in this matter, why cannot he say so?

LORD REA

My Lords, would it make it easier for the noble Earl if he were asked whether Her Majesty's Government would support some other country if it should take the initiative?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

My Lords, if these deliberations were not now going on in Paris there might be a question of someone taking the initiative, but the initiative has already been taken—

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

By whom?

THE EARL OF GOSFORD

—and these controls are under active review in Paris.

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

My Lords, "under active review" does not mean taking an initiative. Has anybody in Paris suggested that the whole thing should go? That is the question before the House.

VISCOUNT ELIBANK

My Lords, is it not the case that the discussions in Paris are merely with a view to reviewing the list and not to ending the embargo as we are demanding?