HC Deb 18 April 1944 vol 399 cc25-7
50. Sir Oliver Simmonds

asked the Prime Minister if he can make any statement with regard to the recent Anglo-American discussions in London concerning post-war civil air transport.

51. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement on the agreement reached between the Lord Privy Seal and Mr. Berle, the representative of the U.S. Government, on the subjection of civil aviation; and whether the concessions announced by the Lord Privy Seal will be reported to the House.

The Prime Minister

The conversations referred to were informal and exploratory. They had for their primary purpose an exchange of views on the desirability of holding an international Conference and on the form of co-operation which each country would advocate on such an occasion. I am glad to say that sufficient agreement was reached for both countries to support the holding of a Conference in the expectation that final dispositions could then be achieved. Concessions were made by both the United Kingdom and the United States of America and related only to the basis on which discussions will be launched at an International Conference. It would not be appropriate or useful for me to make any detailed statement in advance of the Conference which both His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States hope will be held this year.

Sir O. Simmonds

Could my right hon. Friend explain the relation of these conversations to the Imperial conversations last year, and are any of these concessions in opposition to any of the main decisions made at the Imperial Conference?

The Prime Minister

I have said that the discussions which are now taking place with the representative of the United States are concerned with the holding of a conference, and not to any extent primarily with the topics to be discussed at that Conference.

Mr. Shinwell

When Lord Beaverbrook referred to concessions. as reported in the Press, are we to take it that he referred only to procedure, or perhaps to the personnel of the conference, and that there was no commitment of any kind in regard to details about civil aviation after the war?

The Prime Minister

I have said that the conversations were concerned with the desirability of holding an international conference, and the form of co-operation which each country would advocate on such an occasion. It is true that Lord Beaverbrook said that concessions had been made by this country within that sphere, and I have no doubt that concessions were made by the United States, and I think it a very good thing that both countries should be ready to make concessions in order to bring about a conference on the best possible lines. That would be very much better than boasting of achievements at this stage in such a delicate field.

Mr. Bowles

Is there any objection to the House and the country being told what policy the Government are going to advocate at the forthcoming conference?

The Prime Minister

I should like to consider that. I do not think we are in a position to advocate a particular policy at a particular moment. We must give our negotiators a chance, and it is better for us to see what other countries will put forward before we unfold it all. Yet, on the other hand, I can also imagine that it might be an occasion for the House to wish to debate the matter in a general way without pinning our delegates down to any exact particulars.

Mr. Granville

Is it the intention of the Government to keep the Russian Government informed of this exchange of views in order that we may eventually reach a wide international agreement on civil aviation?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir, but the first thing was to agree with the United States about the form in which the international conference should be held, and we are keeping the Russian Government fully informed on this matter and not only on this matter but on a very wide range of subjects.

Mr. Shinwell

Does my right hon. Friend think it would do any harm and that it would be likely to lead to greater clarification of this issue if he embodied in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement on these concessions so that we may know exactly what is meant?

The Prime Minister

It is a very good thing to state the case in that way but I should not be prepared to undertake to specify particular concessions. The other side might say "It was not a concession and we were going to agree to it anyhow," and so on, and out of what was intended to be an act of courtesy and I conceive of good diplomacy might come a stumbling block for the unwary.