MIDDLE EAST (POLICY) (Hansard, 30 June 1948)

§ 38. Mr. Platts-Mills
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the scope of the understanding between His 2203 Majesty's Government and the U.S. Administration to keep each other informed regarding policy developments in the Middle East; and whether he will seek to extend this bilateral arrangement to include the U.S.S.R.

§ Mr. Bevin
His Majesty's Government exchange information and views with other friendly Governments, including the United States Government, about developments in the Middle East and in other parts of the world as occasion arises. His Majesty's Government have not concluded any special bilateral agreement or arrangement for this purpose. The second part of the Question does not, therefore, arise.

§ Mr. Platts-Mills
Does the working of this understanding with the United States include, as Mr. Sumner Welles has just asserted, United States backing for the Foreign Secretary—

Hon. Members
Reading a speech.

§ Mr. Platts-Mills
—and of the Foreign Secretary's encouragement, which just preceded the truce, of Syria and the Lebanon intensifying their campaign, particularly in the case of Syria—

§ Mr. Speaker
That is a supplementary question which is so obviously being read out that it is quite contrary to our custom. Supplementary questions should not be long statements; they should be short and snappy and to the point.

§ Mr. Gallacher
While I agree with your Ruling on that question, Mr. Speaker, a whole series of questions was asked earlier this afternoon, and we had the most laboured and long drawn-out arguments from an hon. Member on the other side, whose constituency I do not remember but who put down the original Question. It was a long, laboured, drawn-out argument directed to the Minister. Nobody protested, and I think a little allowance might be made for the solitary hon. Member behind me.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) will remember that the long, laboured questions were started by a question which came from the opposite side of the House and which had really not very much to do with the original Question.