HC Deb 21 February 1957 vol 565 cc592-5
45. Mr. Emrys Hughes

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he has for discussing the Soviet proposals for the Middle East with President Eisenhower.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

As forecast in my reply to the hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Warbey) on 14th February, consultations on the Soviet proposals are now taking place with our American and French allies. The normal diplomatic channel seems appropriate to this process.

Mr. Hughes

Can the Prime Minister say whether he is going to make a statement on Government policy with reference to the Soviet proposals before he goes to Bermuda?

The Prime Minister

The Question suggests that I should delay considering the proposals until I have gone to Bermuda. I do not think it would be right to defer such study. I think we should carry on the studies now.

Mr. P. Williams

In view of the statement made by President Eisenhower yesterday, and in view of the reports on the tape today that the Foreign Office accepts the Eisenhower doctrine as being the basis of British foreign policy, can my right hon. Friend make a comment on the statement made by the President of the United States yesterday?

The Prime Minister

I have not seen the report on the tape, but this is a matter of how to arrange for a proper reply to be made to the Soviet proposals which were sent to the three Powers jointly. I think it is right that we should consult together jointly before deciding what is the right reply to send.

Mr. Gaitskell

Without entering into the merits of Mr. Shepilov's proposals, may I ask whether the Prime Minister would not agree that in the end we really must discuss the Middle East situation with the Russians and our allies if there is to be any hope of a permanent settlement?

The Prime Minister

That is another question. The first thing is to make a courteous and correct reply to the Note which has been sent to us. In order to do that, we must consider together, and it seemed to me that the right thing was not to wait for the Bermuda meeting but to arrange for consultations through the normal diplomatic channels.

Mr. Bevan

In view of what the Prime Minister has said, will he in the meantime, before any conclusion is reached, try to prevent the Foreign Office giving any indication whatsoever of the attitude towards these proposals? Is it not desirable to keep the whole thing clear until he himself can make a statement to the House about it?

The Prime Minister

The public Departments are sometimes pressed for their views. Sometimes complaints are made because they do no give them. I think that this matter has been handled with a proper degree of reticence and moderation.

Mr. Bevan

Is it not true that they ought not to have views about such a matter until the Government themselves have formed a view?

The Prime Minister

I think it is quite reasonable that if a Minister is pressed—I do not know what statements the right hon. Gentleman is referring to—

Mr. Bevan

Those referred to by the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. P. Williams).

The Prime Minister

We are talking about expressions of views by the Foreign Secretary or the Foreign Office. So far as I know, the Foreign Secretary has expressed no view on this matter, and we are now consulting as to the proper reply that we should make.

Mr. Patrick Maitland

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that if any question of sanctions against Israel forms part of our answer to the Shepilov proposals, it is unlikely to be welcome to people in this country?

The Prime Minister

That is another question. What I am dealing with here is a Note which was presented to us one morning and published that afternoon—a serious and long Note—to which we must prepare a proper reply. The right thing to do is to consult with the two other countries to whom the Note was addressed.

Mr. H. Morrison

But Israel is bound to be involved, I should have thought, in any discussions with the Soviet Union or other Powers with reference to the general problem of the Middle East. Will the Prime Minister give an assurance to the House, which most Members on both sides would welcome, that we are in no way committed to follow the declaration of President Eisenhower in this matter, or the tactical activities of the Secretary of State in the United States?

The Prime Minister

That is quite another question. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has read the Note sent by Mr. Shepilov when he was Foreign Minister. That covers a very wide field. It has nothing to do with this question which is now before the United Nations. What we have to do is to study and try to make a joint reply to that Note.