§ 3. Mr. Usborneasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is to be the United Kingdom quota of contribution to the proposed Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development.
§ 30. Mr. Fenner Brockwayasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what stage has now been reached at the United Nations on the proposal to establish a special United Nations fund for the economic development of underdeveloped countries, known as Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development; and to what extent Her Majesty's Government have reconsidered their view towards it.
§ Mr. TurtonThe Second Committee of the General Assembly adopted, on 25th November, a Resolution inviting Governments to submit their views as definitely as possible on the proposed fund, and setting up a committee of Government representatives to analyse these views and to report to the Economic and Social Council. The United Kingdom Delegation voted for this Resolution. Our attitude towards the establishment of the fund remains as stated in my reply to the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Fenner Brockway) on 7th November.
§ Mr. UsborneDoes the Joint Under-Secretary of State appreciate that when this fund was first proposed it was opposed by America on the ground that it was necessary to get a cut in defence costs first, since when the United States have cut their defence costs by 12,000 million dollars? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I was told by the Minister of Defence a day or two ago that our proposed changes will save us £43 million a year? In view of these savings, have the Government decided that they should now support the United Nations fund?
§ Mr. TurtonI cannot be responsible for any declaration of policy by the United States Government, but our view is now and has always been that it would not be practicable to set up a fund until a substantial measure of internationally-supervised world-wide disarmament had been achieved. That does not mean, in our view, that we should resist the undertaking of a certain amount of preparatory study at the present time.
§ Mr. BrockwayDoes not the right hon. Gentleman regard his first reply as very misleading? What is the use of the Government voting in favour of this proposal at the United Nations and then indicating that they will give no money to assist this purpose? Is he aware of the absolute shame which many of us in this country feel at the niggardly attitude of the Government?
§ Mr. TurtonIt is clear that the hon. Member has misunderstood my reply. What has been agreed by the Second Committee is that a certain amount of preparatory work should be undertaken immediately on this plan. We have always taken the view that until we have an internationally-supervised, world-wide agreement on disarmament it would be 356 impracticable to bring the fund into operation.
§ Mr. BlenkinsopWill the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the continuous delay in bringing a scheme of this sort into operation is the worst possible answer to Communist pressures in Asia?
§ Mr. TurtonThat is why it is so valuable that this preparatory work is now to be undertaken, and in fact the Resolution requests Governments to submit their views before 31st March, 1956.