§ The following Question stood upon the Order Paper:
§ 50. Mr. WYATTTO ask the Prime Minister whether he will initiate a conference among those Powers who have interests in South-East Asia to consider the new situation arising out of the invasion of Laos by the Vietminh forces.
§ Mr. WyattOn a point of order. On Thursday evening I sent a Question to the Table Office which arrived before 11 o'Clock on Friday morning. It read:
What request has been received for assistance from the French Government following upon the invasion of Laos by the Vietminh forces?This Question was put down for answer for today. I was later informed—I was not, in fact, informed until today—that you, Mr. Speaker, had ruled that as you did not know whether or not the French Government had made such a request you would not allow such a Question. I had always understood that it was the responsibility of Members to make themselves responsible for the statements in their Questions. I was myself satisfied that the French Government had made such a request and I do not think that there is any dispute that they have requested assistance from us.I then asked, as it was now too late for the Question to appear on the Order Paper on Monday—as it would have done if you. Mr. Speaker, had not held it up— whether I could ask a Private Notice Question about this matter today. This invasion of Laos is a very urgent matter. You, Mr. Speaker, then told me that I could not ask a Private Notice Question because Question No. 50, on today's Order Paper, in my name, was on similar lines, although it is not the same Question by any means. Question No. 50, through no fault of mine, has not been reached. What redress have I? Can I have an answer from the Prime Minister or a representative of the Foreign Office on this matter?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am afraid that the whole sequence of events in this matter has been rather unfortunate. The hon. Member's first Question was phrased in such a way as to make it necessary for me to ask him for the prima facie facts on which he based it. The hon. Member will find the reference to that in May's "Parliamentary Practice," page 342. I think that the hon. Member was sent a notice, in the usual way, asking him to speak to the Clerk about this Question. Unfortunately, the hon. Member was not here on Friday when the matter could have been dealt with. When I received the Question again in the form of a Private Notice Question, I was swayed in my 34 refusal of it by the fact that Question No. 50 was on the Order Paper on a similar matter, and I would have allowed the hon. Member to ask supplementary questions on it. But through no fault of his, nor of mine, the Question has not been reached.
§ Mr. WyattAs I think you will agree, Mr. Speaker, certainly it was no fault of mine that the Question was not reached. I think that I am correct in saying that you have agreed that my Question was in perfectly correct form and that I was justified in asking it. The rules of the House state that I am responsible for the statement made in it and I am quite happy to be responsible for that statement. May we not, as a concession, have an answer from the Prime Minister either to Question No. 50 or to the original Question which I sought to ask?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe circumstances here are very unusual and if the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister has the answer to Question No. 50 he may give it.
§ The Prime MinisterI have not even seen this answer. I beg pardon; I find that I wrote this out myself, in the expectation that the Question might be reached.
Her Majesty's Government are indeed anxious about what is happening in Laos, and they are in touch with the Governments principally affected. I do not consider that a special conference would at present be helpful or that we should try to call one. I might also express my commiseration with the hon. Member for Aston (Mr. Wyatt), whose blamelessness in this respect is apparent to the House.
§ Mr. WyattWill the Prime Minister bear in mind that while many of us feel that the French have not behaved very wisely in Indo-China since the end of the war, it would be an extremely dangerous position for the Commonwealth and the whole world if Indo-China were occupied by the Communist forces? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, for example, that in Malaya the Chinese who are now supporting the Government might well cease to do so in that eventuality; and that Burma and Siam would be severely threatened? Is it not a question in which the right hon. Gentleman should be taking urgent and positive action rather 35 than sitting by, waiting for events to happen over which he will have no control at all?
§ The Prime MinisterWe are watching these events most vigilantly, but our resources are limited and our obligations are very widespread. I think it would be quite suitable for the hon. Gentleman, if he should catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, in the course of the foreign affairs debate, to raise this matter, but I think that a few chance remarks from me on the spur of the moment would hardly alleviate the situation.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerCan the Prime Minister confirm that on the day when the danger to Laos became very grave there were threats laid against Siam by Radio Peking?
§ The Prime MinisterI must have missed that particular item in the Radio Peking broadcast.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerIf this is an indication that an attack may be contemplated on Siam, which is an independent member of the United Nations, is it not the duty of the Foreign Office to draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to these facts?
§ The Prime MinisterI am watching very carefully what happens in Siam, but I cannot feel that I have been ill-treated by the Foreign Office in not having my attention drawn to this particular reference on the radio from Peking.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We have had a long spell on this matter.