§ 27. Mr. Osborneasked the President of the Board of Trade to make a further statement on the latest reports he has 193 received about the British trade negotiations in Moscow.
§ 39. Mr. Grimondasked the President of the Board of Trade what further information he has as to the value or nature of the goods, recently the subject of a trade agreement in Moscow, for which export licences may be refused.
Mr. AmoryMy right hon. Friend and I have now met a number of the businessmen who have recently visited Moscow. I understand that they have signed contracts worth about £16 million and are pursuing other important inquiries. Of the contracts signed, approval has already been given for the export of trawlers valued at approximately £6 million.
Some of the other contracts include items which would appear to be on the strategic control lists and need further consideration; but on the basis of information already available, I would judge that at least half of these contracts will be permissible.
Mr. OsbomeMay I ask two questions? Could my right hon. Friend say whether export licences will be granted for the £3½ million of firm orders which have been received for machine tools which, if not supplied by this country, will be supplied by Sweden and Switzerland? Can he, secondly, assure the House that export licences will be granted for the £1 million of diesel engines, and that the export of these will be increased rapidly, otherwise they will be supplied from Germany? Can my right hon. Friend assure the House that export licences will be granted in respect of those two groups?
Mr. AmoryMachine tools come into the category which I have mentioned, where some of them appear to be on the strategic control lists. Further consideration is, therefore, to be given to them. We are awaiting the exact specifications from the manufacturers as to the particular machine tools. I think the same thing may apply to diesel equipment, although I hope that in a substantial proportion of the cases it may be found to be all right. The examination is to take place at the earliest possible moment, and I am afraid the answer will depend on the exact specifications of the goods which have been ordered.
§ Mr. GrimondWhile welcoming the success of this mission, may I follow up the questions already put to the Minister? Can he say what guarantee there is that if we refuse export licences for these goods, other Western nations will not grant export licences, so that we shall lose very important business?
Mr. AmoryAs the hon. Member knows, the embargo list is agreed on the recommendation of the Consultative Group, which includes most of the nations of Western Europe and Canada and the United States. We have no reason to believe that any of the member nations of the Consultative Group is likely to do otherwise than carry out the agreement into which it has entered.
§ Mr. NicholsonRegarding the embargo group, is the theory behind the agreement the theory that Western nations themselves need those machine tools or is it that the selling of them to a potential enemy would be dangerous?
Mr. AmoryThe basic principal behind the agreement, of course, is to identify and separate items which will contribute directly to military potential. It is a most difficult matter.
§ Mr. PannellWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there is a great deal of muddle behind his answer? Sewing machines could be instruments of war, as could lathes or boring machines, and they could also be used for peaceful ends. What we want is a complete reclassification.
Mr. AmoryI do not disagree with what the hon. Member has said. It is extraordinarily difficult to decide what is an instrument of military potential and what is not, because these machines have common uses. All I can say is that these very difficult matters are under frequent, almost continuous, consideration in the Group. I am sure the hon. Member will agree that we must move there in co-operation with other nations.