HC Deb 02 November 1956 vol 558 cc1753-64

11.5 a.m.

Mr. Gaitskell

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to accept the decision of the United Nations General Assembly for a cease-fire in the Middle East.

The Prime Minister (Sir Anthony Eden)

The information on the debate is only just reaching me. I notice that Australia and New Zealand voted against the resolution, and that there were several abstentions, including Canada and South Africa. [HON. MEMBERS : "Sixty-four voted for".] In the circumstances, I must be given an opportunity to study the resolution and the speeches before I make any statement to the House.

Mr. Gaitskell

The House will have heard with dismay and disappointment the answer given by the Prime Minister. Surely the Prime Minister must have been well aware of the nature of the resolution moved by the United States delegate. Surely he must have been aware by now of the issues at stake. Does he realise that a resolution, carried by a majority of 64 to 5—an overwhelming majority—is one which Her Majesty's Government, in all honour, in our opinion, are bound to accept?

The Prime Minister

I have stated quite clearly that I must be given the opportunity to study both the resolution and the speeches made in the debate.

Mr. P. Williams

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that there are some of us on this side of the House who are getting sick and tired of the ability of the Opposition to sympathise with the enemies of Britain?

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I hope this matter can be dealt with factually. Mr. Clement Davies.

Mr. C. Davies

Does not the Prime Minister regard a vote given by the United Nations in session of this kind as a directive given by the highest court in the world?

The Prime Minister

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, this is a recommendation. I desire to study both the terms of the recommendation and the speeches which were made in the debate before I add any other word to the statement I have made.

Mr. P. Noel-Baker

Does the Prime Minister realise how this vote in the Assembly will look to other people? Three of the five votes cast against it were the votes of the parties who were accused of violating the Charter. Australia and New Zealand voted with us out of traditional loyalty, but with evident doubt and hesitation. The six who abstained were not willing to obstruct the resolution from coming into effect. Is the Prime Minister not aware that, under the Charter, this is not what he calls a recommendation, but it is a decision, and, by the terms of the Charter which he himself helped to draft in San Francisco, it is binding upon us?

Mr. A. Henderson

In view of the fact that the Prime Minister must be well aware of the substance of the resolution that was passed yesterday by the General Assembly, although he may wish for time to study it, will he not give an undertaking to the House that he will halt all further armed attacks upon Egypt until he has given that consideration to it?

The Prime Minister

No, Sir ; I can give no such undertaking.

Mr. Bevan

Right hon. Members in some parts of the House might sympathise with the desire of the Prime Minister to have further time to think over this matter; but does he not realise that the United Nations Assembly is remaining in session and that, consequently, any news which is sent from here is bound to have a most profound effect upon the Assembly itself? Will he, therefore, give an undertaking that he will be able to make a definitive statement before the end of the day?

The Prime Minister

I have considered that, but I cannot give that undertaking.

Mr. J. Griffiths

May I ask the Prime Minister whether his answer now given means that this House will not have an opportunity of further considering the matter until Monday, and that the General Assembly is to remain in session until Monday before this House is told what the decision of the Government is? Does he not realise that this is really again flouting the decision of the General Assembly of the United Nations?

The Prime Minister

I really do not think so. I do not think it will be considered so if I ask for an opportunity to study a number of very grave—

Mr. Robens

A number of lives will be lost before the right hon. Gentleman decides.

The Prime Minister

—a number of very important speeches, the texts of which have not even yet reached me.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Prime Minister aware that the resolution carried by this overwhelming majority in the Assembly of the United Nations urges as a matter of priority that all parties now involved in hostilities in the area—and we are one of those parties—agree to an immediate cease-fire and that this matter will brook no delay? Will he reconsider the announcement that he made just now, that he was not prepared to make a statement before the House rises? If he adheres to that, is he aware that the House will have no opportunity of discussing the matter further, or of hearing any further statement from the Prime Minister, before Monday, and that he is, therefore, putting the House and the country in an intolerable position?

The Prime Minister

I regret the circumstance that we should now be towards the end of the week, but I do not think that anybody could consider it unreasonable, in a matter of this importance, that I should be given an opportunity even to study all the speeches made, not only by members of the Commonwealth but by those who do not agree with us.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Prime Minister aware that while we were disappointed that he was unable to make an immediate statement, we should be prepared to agree that he should have some hours to consider this matter? What we are now asking is that he should make a statement before the House rises, at, say, three o'clock this afternoon. He will then have had nearly four hours in which to consider this. What is the objection? What is the difficulty about his making a statement at three o'clock?

The Prime Minister

The difficulty and the objection is that I cannot be certain that by then I shall have even the text, let alone the opportunity to examine what was said in the course of this debate ; and that I must have before I can make any statement to the House.

Mr. Bevan

Even though the Prime Minister may not be able to give an assurance now that he will be able to make a definitive statement before the end of the Sitting, can he not give an undertaking that he will make a statement—even make a statement to say that he cannot make a statement? How does he know what will be the result of his study in the next three or four hours? Surely, out of courtesy to the House, he could give a promise that he will make a statement before the end of the Sitting, not necessarily one that satisfies us and not necessarily one that agrees with the resolution.

Sir H. Mackeson

rose—

Hon. Members

Sit down.

Mr. Bevan

May I finish?

Sir H. Mackeson

On a point of order. May I say that some of us on this side of the House are getting fed up with the heckling of those opposite—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Prime Minister has said that he is not prepared to give an undertaking and is not prepared to add to his statement. I ask the House to consider whether further questions are not really a waste of time.

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Bevan

With all due respect, Sir, I must say that in a matter of this gravity, it is not good enough to say that questions on this matter might be a waste of time. The question which I am addressing to the Prime Minister is a new one, and I am addressing it in all courtesy. Suppose we assume that the Prime Minister needs more time, and suppose we accept that he cannot give an assurance now that he will be able to make a final statement on the resolution of the United Nations before the end of the Sitting. Surely he can make a statement as to what may be the result of the study he will make in the meantime, before the end of the Sitting.

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman has put his question perfectly courteously. At the same time, I do not want to mislead the House. I cannot give any undertaking, because I am not yet in possession even of the report of our own representative at the United Nations. These are matters upon which one must be allowed the ordinary opportunities for study. I am not prepared, and no Prime Minister would be prepared in a situation of this kind, to give any undertaking. That is my regret. I cannot do that.

Mr. Healey

On a point of order. The Prime Minister has said that he does not wish to mislead the House. On Tuesday, I asked the Prime Minister whether he had consulted the United States and Commonwealth Governments before taking the action he has taken and he said that he had been in close communication with the United States Government and with the Commonwealth Governments. Reports have come in from every Commonwealth capital, and from Washington, that they were not consulted. I wish you could advise me, Mr. Speaker : Could you please tell me what is the Parliamentary expression which comes closest to expressing the meaning of the word "liar"?

Mr. Speaker

I do not think that is a proper question. That is really an evasion.

The Prime Minister

If I might answer that charge, if the hon. Member will look at HANSARD he will see it quite clearly stated from the beginning that I declared that we had taken action—the French Government and ourselves—on our own responsibility.

Mr. Gaitskell

On a point of order. A very grave situation has now developed. By a substantial, indeed an overwhelming, majority, the policies of Her Majesty's Government have, in effect, been condemned by the United Nations General Assembly and we are urged to desist from those policies. In the normal course of events, this is a matter which unquestionably ought to be discussed immediately or as soon as possible.

If it were not a Friday I would certainly seek to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9. Unfortunately, I understand that one is not permitted to move the Adjournment of the House, or the Motion cannot be accepted, at any rate, on a Friday. I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker. It is quite intolerable that this House should separate at the end of the day without any further discussion on this matter. I ask you to advise us as to how we may discuss this vitally important matter, perhaps the most crucial situation since September, 1939.

Mr. Speaker

On one of the first four days of the Parliamentary week it would be possible to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House. As the right hon. Gentleman has very correctly stated, it is not possible on a Friday. Hon. Members will find that stated in Erskine May, page 350. Indeed, it follows from the Standing Orders, because Standing Order No. 9 says that if leave to move the Adjournment under that order is granted by the House, then the debate stands over until seven o'clock ; whereas the effect of Standing Order No. 2 is that the House must rise on Friday at half-past four. It is not in order to move the Adjournment on a Friday under that Standing Order. I am afraid that I cannot further advise the House. I am bound by the rules.

Mr. J. Griffiths

We fully appreciate that we are debarred by the Standing Orders from moving the Adjournment of the House, but may I ask this question, Sir? Here is a very grave situation in which the House will rise at 4.30 p.m. today and will not reassemble until Monday afternoon. In my experience of the House, in a situation of this kind the House has met on Saturday and on Sunday. While appreciating the Prime Minister's desire to have time to consider it, in view of the grave situation may I ask you what steps we can take to secure that this House, like the General Assembly, is kept in continuous session until the Government have made up their mind and declared their intentions?

Mr. Speaker

Again, I am at a loss as to how I should advise the House on this matter. It would need a special resolution to do that, and that is not in my hands.

Mr. Griffiths

May I ask the Leader of the House whether, in view of what I am sure is the desire of the House of Commons that we shall continue in session, the Government will now take steps to ensure that the House is kept in session until the Government can make a full statement on the resolution of the General Assembly.

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. R. A. Butler)

The House will have heard what the Prime Minister has said about the position in which he is, namely, that he must have an opportunity of studying the situation arising out of the Assembly's vote. The request—[Interruption.] Perhaps the hon. Member would, unlike last night, allow me to speak without interruption, for it is quite difficult.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Are men to be killed while the Government consider?

Mr. Butler

Perhaps, if I could have order. Mr. Speaker, I could go on.

Mr. Hughes

On a point of order. I was putting a perfectly relevant question, Sir. I asked whether the men are to be killed during the week-end while the Government are considering the matter.

Mr. Speaker

We are discussing a matter of procedure now, and I hope that these extraneous matters will not be brought in.

Mr. Butler

That is precisely why I said what I did. It is a question of procedure necessary in the legitimate interests of the hon. Member and of other hon. Members. I am dealing now solely with procedure. On that agreement of the procedure, I cannot do more than this. A request has been made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that the House should remain in continuous session. I think it unlikely the Government would agree to that request. I think that all we can do is consider whether there is any method of satisfying the House in respect of the request of the right hon. Gentleman.

Therefore, I must ask now for an opportunity to consider with the Prime Minister and my other colleagues what we are to do to meet the wish put by the right hon. Gentleman. I can do nothing as Leader of the House—and I know I have a responsibility to the whole House—without consulting the Prime Minister and my other colleagues, and, above all, I cannot give any undertaking now about anything we can do. The only undertaking I can give is to have consultation with my right hon. Friends.

Mr. Griffiths

I appreciate that the Lord Privy Seal will want an opportunity of considering this matter. May I put this point to him, because it is important. If his consideration leads to the granting of what I am sure is the desire of the House, that we should be kept in session, will he undertake to make a statement and to make it in such time as will permit the procedure, whatever it is, to be followed and that will enable us to sit tomorrow and Sunday until Monday? Will he give that undertaking?

Mr. Butler

I cannot do anything immediate now. What we would do would be to communicate, through the usual channels, the result of any consultation that I may have with my right hon. Friends.

Mr. Gaitskell

The Lord Privy Seal will appreciate that it is extremely important that we should know as soon as possible what decisions are arrived at in this matter, so that hon. Members can make the necessary arrangements to be in attendance. I would ask him whether it would be possible to complete these discussions which he wishes to have with the Prime Minister and which are entirely on the procedural point by, say, 12 o'clock so that he can come along and make a statement then. Will he give an undertaking that, at any rate, he will endeavour to do that?

Mr. Butler

No, I could not give any undertaking as to time. It is quite possible to make known, through the usual channels, what time any statement can be made. What I cannot undertake is that the House should be kept in continuous session. Nor can I undertake, for reasons which are regarded as important in the country, that the House should sit on Sunday. [Interruption.] Well, several of us have views about sitting on Sundays which are just as strong as the right hon. Gentleman's. [HON. MEMBERS : "Oh."] I am, frankly, warning the House of the limitations of anything that the Government, or I, as Leader of the House, may be able to do. I am saying that the first thing to do is to consider the request made to me, then to have consultations with the Prime Minister and my other right hon. Friends, and then to have conversations through the usual channels.

Mr. Bevan

I should like to ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman has said—I think quite properly—that he must have consultations before giving the assurance required. What we want to know is by what procedure can we be given the guarantee that before the end of the Sitting a statement can be made from that Box about the discussions? This is the difficulty in which we lie. We should like your guidance, Sir. Perhaps you will help us. In what way can we receive what we consider to be a satisfactory assurance through the usual channels?

I ask the Leader of the House to consider another aspect of this matter. Last night, in his speech, he was good enough to express his satisfaction at the decision of the National Council of Labour in this matter. We are at war. We now hear today that the vast majority of the United Nations Assembly has condemned our action in being at war. It will be extremely difficult for us to restrain action in the country.

Will not the Government help us a bit? If Parliament, as the forum of popular expression, is to be denied the opportunity of considering this grave matter, what answer have we got if people outside say, "We must take action ourselves"? The only argument we have, in my respectful submission, in order to keep peace in the country and to prevent action of a kind we might all deplore, is to be able to say that Parliament has taken charge of the situation.

If Parliament is not allowed to take charge of the situation, what answer have we got? Would the Government and hon. Members opposite enable us to be able to give people in the country answers about our democratic processes which would satisfy them? I really do suggest that the Government are behaving with childish irresponsibility without precedent in the history of this country.

Mr. Butler

That statement needs immediate correction. There were conversations through the usual channels and personally with the Leader of the Opposition about the wishes of the Opposition and the Sittings of Parliament. [HON. MEMBERS : "When?"] Those wishes were that Parliament should remain in session, and that we postpone Prorogation. [HON. MEMBERS : "Quite right."] Actually, the position was that an Order in Council was about to be signed proroguing Parliament. On my personal responsibility, to meet the wishes of the Opposition, I checked the Order being signed. We did that on purpose.

We then agreed that the House should sit yesterday. We altered the Sitting to suit the Opposition yesterday. We are sitting today and we agreed, to meet the Opposition, that we should sit on Monday. We also agreed to accept the request about the time of Prorogation on Monday. What is new is the further request from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I say that no one either here or in the country should imagine that the Government have not been entirely reasonable in listening to the requests of the Opposition.

All I have undertaken today is now, at this hour—and the sooner we can get together outside to consider this the better—to consider the further request of the Opposition in relation to the resolution of the Assembly.

Mr. Gaitskell

We make no complaint about the arrangements which, as the right hon. Gentleman has correctly said, at our request were made about the postponement of Prorogation, but a totally new situation has now arisen, a very grave situation indeed, and it is for that reason that we consider we should remain in continuous session. I think the Lord Privy Seal understands our very legitimate anxieties in this matter. I do not believe that he would challenge what my right hon. Friend said just now about the desirability of showing to the country and to the whole of the world that our democratic processes are in full operation.

I would ask him only this. He says it is necessary that he should have consultations with his right hon. Friend. We understand the necessity of that. By whatever means we can remain in session, whether we can, perhaps, extend the Sitting today, whether we can meet tomorrow and on Sunday, whatever the time may be, we ask the right hon. Gentleman to make the earliest possible statement about it. We asked him to make it at about 12 o'clock. He said that he could not be sure. Can he at least say that it will be by 1 o'clock—I do not want to go on bargaining about this—that this statement will be made—not later than 1 o'clock? It is essential that it should be made as soon as possible in the interests of hon. Members.

Mr. Butler

We have handled these things quite satisfactorily before. First, we must have an opportunity of considering this matter ourselves, and then discuss it through the usual channels, which have been quite satisfactory in the interests of the House, and then indicate to the House what we can do. I cannot give an actual time limit, because I cannot say when these discussions will be finished.

Mr. Bevan

May I have an answer to my request to you, Mr. Speaker? If a statement is not made by the Government, by what arrangement can the Opposition seek, during this Sitting, to elicit a statement from the Government?

Mr. Speaker

To some extent the question is hypothetical. There may be a statement, but I could not answer that offhand.

Mr. J. Griffiths

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal a question? If, as a result of his consideration, the House is to remain in session, presumably it would be necessary to move a Motion. I asked earlier, and I should like to repeat, what time this afternoon, in view of the rules of the House, it will be permissible to move a Motion and carry it, by which the House would remain in session?

Mr. Butler

I do not want to prejudice whatever arrangements are made. The only warning I gave was that I could not undertake that the House would be in continuous session. I have to pay attention to the request that there should be an opportunity for this latest development to be considered by the House of Commons, and, in answer to the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) give the country the correct impression, namely, the responsibility and anxiety of the House in the matter. That is my duty as Leader of the House, and that I will undertake to discharge.

Mr. Griffiths

Could you, Mr. Speaker, advise us as to the latest time today at which the House will be in order in deciding to remain in session?

Mr. Speaker

Under the Standing Orders, business is interrupted at 4 o'clock and, as far as I know at the moment—this is rather a surprise to me—anything before 4 o'clock would be in order.