§ 11. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give an assurance that, while Her Majesty's Government have taken steps 1188 to tighten the existing system of controls over shipments of strategic materials to China, they will not tolerate any stopping of, or interference with, British merchant ships trading with Chinese Communist ports.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydYes, Sir. The position remains, as my right hon. Friend made clear in the debate on 5th February, that British ships on their lawful occasions will be protected.
§ Mr. Hector HughesWill the Minister specify what steps he has taken to protect British shipping in this matter, in how many cases these steps have been applied, and with what results?
§ Mr. LloydI do not think it is the practice, nor is it desirable, to disclose operational instructions which are sent to units of Her Majesty's Forces.
§ Mr. Harold DaviesCan the Minister assure the House that there has been no extension of the policy as put forward by the President of the Board of Trade on 19th June, 1951, when he told the House that there was no intention of a total embargo being imposed upon China? Is he aware that in the last two months we have lost orders for £ 10 million worth of machinery, £ 500,000 worth of tinplate and £ 2 million worth of drugs as a result of this silly policy?
§ Mr. LloydThere is not a total embargo. The policy which has been carried out is that to which Her Majesty's Government were committed on 18th May, 1951, pursuant to the Resolution of the United Nations.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanWhile no doubt the United Kingdom is bound by that Resolution of the United Nations, would the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that there is nothing in that Resolution to justify the extension of the definition of strategic material to cover everything which is so designated by the Battle Act?
§ Mr. LloydI certainly would agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is nothing in the Resolution which would imply a total embargo on China.