EXPORT OF ARMS (Hansard, 24 April 1956)

§ 48. Mr. A. Henderson
asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the present policy of the Foreign Office with regard to the disclosure of information on the export of arms to foreign countries differs from that of the Ministry of Supply; and whether he will take steps to co-ordinate the future practice of Government Departments on such matters.

§ 49. Mr. Shinwell
asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the policy of the Labour Administration in 1949 in giving details of the countries to which types of arms had been exported has now been changed and that Her Majesty's Government will now no longer give this information; and the reason for this change in policy.

§ The Prime Minister
My right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary explained the position on 16th April. It is—and has been under successive Governments—contrary to the normal practice to disclose details of current exports of military equipment to foreign countries. Her 1615 Majesty's Government do not propose to depart from this practice. I know of no differences in the manner in which Departments today execute the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

§ Mr. Henderson
Did not the Prime Minister state publicly last November that Russian-type tanks, aircraft and even submarines had been supplied to the Government of Egypt and has it not also been stated publicly that Centurion tanks have been supplied by this country to Egypt? Is it not desirable in the circumstances that the Government should consider modifying the normal practice to which the Prime Minister just referred, so that we could be told what steps are being taken to supply the Government of Israel with comparable types of aircraft so as to maintain the arms balance in the Middle East?

§ The Prime Minister
I have considered this matter. It is quite true that there have been occasional exceptions from the general rule, but I believe that, on balance, advantage lies in maintaining the rule hitherto observed.

§ Mr. Shinwell
If the right hon. Gentleman admits that there has been an occasion when information asked for has been furnished to hon. Members, why does he regard the present case as an exception? Is it because the Foreign Secretary sought to shield himself behind this alleged practice, when it was not a practice at all, because he did not want to furnish information about the number of tanks and aircraft sent to Egypt and the Arab States, while, at the same time, no material of that kind has been sent to the State of Israel? Was it not a complete evasion?

§ The Prime Minister
I do not think so. The right hon. Gentleman, for whose observations on defence I have always had great respect, once replied to similar Questions that it was contrary to normal practice to give details of sales of defence equipment. It is true that the right hon. Gentleman followed that up with a later answer saying that Though it is contrary to normal practice … I think it right to make an exception in this case."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 29th November, 1950; Vol. 481, c. 1154.] It is not for me to say whether the right hon. Gentleman's attitude was logical. I 1616 am only saying that it is one which we are not going to follow.

§ Mr. Shinwell
Is the Prime Minister not aware that the information asked for was not about quantities or details of arms provided to Egypt or the Arab States but to which countries those exports were sent? Is not that the position? Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman answer the question?

§ The Prime Minister
No, Sir. The right hon. Gentleman gave the actual numbers.

§ Mr. Shinwell
No, Sir.

§ The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir. The right hon. Gentleman did. I have got it here. The right hon. Gentleman said that seven tanks left between May and October. He made an exception. I am not complaining. Anybody can make exceptions if he wants to do so, but I am saying that, on the whole, we had better not persist in that practice.

§ Mr. Gaitskell
Would the Prime Minister not agree that whatever may be the merits of the normal rule of not disclosing this information, there are occasions when it is desirable to disclose it? Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that in respect of the balance of arms to the Middle East it is extremely important not only that it should be maintained, but that it should be seen to be maintained? Will the right hon. Gentleman please reconsider the matter in relation to the present situation in the Middle East?

§ The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman will recall that in a recent debate I made a considered statement about how the general balance of arms lay at present in the Middle East, and I have no present reason to alter that statement. As I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will readily agree, that is different from saying what particular weapon is going to what particular country, especially as, of course, we are only an element in the situation.

§ Mr. H. Morrison
Will the Prime Minister take into account that it has been more than once asserted by Ministers that there is a fair equity in the supply of arms as between Israel and the Arab States? May I put it to the right hon. Gentleman for consideration and 1617 answer whether we should not be in a far better position to judge whether Ministers are right or wrong if we had reasonable facts about the supply of arms to Israel and the Arab States? Therefore, is it not reasonable that my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) should make this request?

§ The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman, with his long experience, knows well, this has been many times weighed and considered, but I think that these are matters in which Her Majesty's Government must take responsibility. I gave what I am sure was a fair and true assessment of the balance of armaments in that particular part of the world quite a short time ago, and I have no present reason to alter it.

§ Mr. Gaitskell
Is the Prime Minister not aware that he admitted in that statement that the balance of arms would be before very long seriously upset by the delivery of Czech arms to Egypt? Is the right hon. Gentleman still giving consideration to this matter in order that the balance may be restored?

§ The Prime Minister
I think that it is fair to say that my Answer covers the point which the right hon. Gentleman raises. I have no present reason to change the assessment that I gave in that last debate.

§ Mr. Shinwell
In view of the fact that after considerable persistence, in order to obtain a satisfactory reply from the Prime Minister, I have not been successful, I beg to give notice that if there is not to be a debate on the Middle East position generally, I shall raise this matter on some occasion on the Adjournment.