§ 47. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister whether he has considered the statements made by the Secretary of State for War at Fayid on 21st September to the effect that if Britain were to be without her present base in Egypt it would be a loss but not an irretrievable one, and at a Press Conference on 24th September to the effect that the strategic value of the Suez Canal Zone was of such vital importance not only to Britain but to the West as a whole that it should be maintained; and which of these statements represent the policy of the Government.
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that the two statements are contradictory. The importance of a base in the Canal Zone for the defence of Egypt and the Middle East is beyond dispute. This was what my right hon. Friend was concerned to say.
§ Mr. ShinwellAre we to understand that this alleged inconsistency in the two statements had no effect on the Prime Minister of Egypt? Was not some resentment incurred as a result of one of those statements?
§ The Prime MinisterI really do not know what the right hon. Gentleman is talking about. I should, of course, wish to treat with great attention anything that he might say upon the subject of contradictory statements by politicians or Ministers. He is a past master of the art himself.
§ Mr. ShinwellPerhaps the right hon. Gentleman will recall that when he was on this side of the House, it was common practice to attack statements made by Ministers without any justification whatever, and he must not complain if we venture to ask him questions. He asked whether I would tell him what the trouble is about. I can tell him straightaway: is he not aware that the Prime Minister of Egypt expressed resentment, which was reported in the public Press, about one of the statements made by the Secretary of State for War?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not see the relevance of that. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] No; I am giving my opinion, as the House asked me to do, on whether the statements were contradictory. The Prime Minister of Egypt may have a different view on quite a lot of matters from the Prime Minister at present serving in this country.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs the right hon. Gentleman actually telling the House that a statement made by the Secretary of State for War that the loss of the Canal Zone would not be irretrievable, and at the same time saying that it is a matter of vital interest to this country and of strategic interest to the Middle East, is not contradictory?
§ The Prime MinisterThere are matters which are of vital interest and which if they go wrong are not irretrievable. We had a great many examples of that in the Great War.