HC Deb 27 July 1956 vol 557 cc777-80

11.6 a.m.

Mr. Gaitskell

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he has any statement to make on the reported action of the Egyptian Government in regard to the Suez Canal?

The Prime Minister (Sir Anthony Eden)

Yes, Sir. The unilateral decision of the Egyptian Government to expropriate the Suez Canal Company, without notice and in breach of the Concession Agreements, affects the rights and interests of many nations. Her Majesty's Government are consulting other Governments immediately concerned, with regard to the serious situation thus created. The consultations will cover both the effect of this arbitary action upon the operation of the Suez Canal and also the wider questions which it raises.

Mr. Gaitskell

On this side of the House, we deeply deplore this highhanded and totally unjustifiable step by the Egyptian Government. Has the Prime Minister in mind to refer this matter to the Security Council? Has he yet come to any decision on that point? In view of the seizure of the property of the Suez Canal Company and the vague statement about future compensation, will he bear in mind the desirability of blocking the sterling balances of the Egyptian Government?

The Prime Minister

I am quite sure that the right hon. Gentleman will understand if I say that I would not wish to make a direct answer to his last question beyond saying that what he has mentioned has been already in our minds. As regards the Security Council, I would rather not say what action the countries concerned—we are in consultation, naturally, now with them—would wish to take, whether in the Security Council, or immediate diplomatic action, or whatever it may be.

Captain Waterhouse

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the statement that he has just made will be widely approved in all parts of the country? In his consultation will he bear in mind that, under the Convention of October, 1888, Article III lays down that the High Contracting Powers undertake to respect the plant, establishments, buildings, and works of the Maritime Canal and of the Fresh-Water canal"; and, further, that Article VII of the same Convention gives each of the High Contracting Powers the right to put not more than two warships at the ports at either end of the Canal, that is to say, Port Said and Port Suez?

The Prime Minister

My right hon. and gallant Friend and the House can be assured that we have, not for the first time, examined international rights in this matter. There are a great many undertakings that have been given that are of later date and perhaps, in a sense, even more binding on the Egyptian Government than those which my right hon. and gallant Friend has quoted.

Mr. Clement Davies

May I be allowed to say, on behalf of myself and my colleagues, that we associate ourselves with what has been said by the Leader of the Opposition about this deplorable action? I assume that the Governments which will be consulted, and which are immediately concerned, will be the other eight who were parties to the Convention of 1888? Has the Prime Minister anyone else in mind besides those eight?

The Prime Minister

I am not sure about the immediate definition mentioned by the right hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. C. Davies). It is not only a question of the Convention. I do not want to go into detail, but, of course, there are later agreements than the Convention which are concerned here. All I can say to the House is that we got in touch, and are in touch, with the United States Government and the French Government, and we are in touch this morning with a number of Governments, I hope all, of the Commonwealth. I would ask the House not to press me to say more than that at the moment, if right hon. and hon. Members would not mind. The situation must be handled with both firmness and care, I think. I would undertake to give the fullest information to the House at every stage.

Mr. J. Amery

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he will have the overwhelming support of public opinion in this country on whatever steps he decides to take, however grave, to repair this injury to our honour and interests?

Mr. Paget

Is the Prime Minister aware that there do not exist in the world today sufficient tankers to move the oil required by Europe without using the Suez Canal, and that this is a threat to strangle the whole industry of Europe? Is he further aware that this "weekend technique" is precisely the technique which we got used to in Hitler's day? Is he also aware of the consequences of not answering force with force until it is too late?

The Prime Minister

I made my statement and I have answered questions with some care. I think it would be a wiser judgment of the House—of course, hon. Members may say anything that is in their minds—that I should not go beyond anything I have said.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

Will the Government take steps to reinforce the Suez Canal Zone base with civilian employees and stores to the fullest extent of our rights under Annexe II of the 1954 Agreement?

Mr. Robens

My right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition has requested the Prime Minister to look at the question of the sterling balances. I do not ask the Prime Minister to reply now, but will he also consider whether we should continue to send more arms to Egypt?

The Prime Minister

That matter, also, has been in our minds. The House can be assured that these matters are in our thoughts. I think I ought frankly to tell the House that we are having a Cabinet meeting the moment the House adjourns to take decisions on certain of these matters. I think I should really rather not say any more on the Floor of the House.

Several Hon. Membersrose—

Mr. Speaker

I think that the House should respond to what the Prime Minister has said.