§ 16. Mr. Warbeyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs by which Minister the Government will be represented at the forthcoming meetings of the Disarmament Sub-Committee.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydMy right hon. and gallant Friend the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs will lead the United Kingdom Delegation at the forthcoming meetings of the Disarmament Sub-Committee. I hope to be present myself at the opening meeting on 18th March.
§ Mr. WarbeyI welcome the decision of the right hon. and learned Gentleman to be present. May I ask him whether, if rapid progress is made—as we all hope it will be—he will himself be prepared to intervene again at a later stage in order to bring the discussions to the point of agreement?
§ Mr. LloydCertainly I should be prepared to intervene at a later stage, but I am not certain that my intervention would have the result which the hon. Member envisages.
§ 17. Mr. Warbeyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will submit to the Disarmament Sub-Committee a draft disarmament convention embracing such measures of disarmament, inspection and control as represent common ground between the major Powers.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydCertainly not at the outset, Sir. There is not yet sufficient common ground between the major Powers to enable Her Majesty's Government to draw up a draft disarmament convention on this basis. They sincerely hope, however, that the forthcoming meeting of the United Nations Disarmament Sub-Committee will achieve sufficient progress to make this possible.
§ Mr. WarbeyIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that his reply is rather surprising to those who have studied the proposals put forward by the various Powers at various times? Will he not at least say that the British Government are prepared to go in for as much disarmament as can be agreed on and controlled, and which will not alter substantially the balance between the major Powers?
§ Mr. LloydYes, it is absolutely true that Her Majesty's Government are prepared to enter into either a comprehensive agreement or a partial agreement. The only reason why I said "Certainly not at the outset" is that I am not satisfied that to try to prepare a draft disarmament convention at the beginning of the conference would be a wise way for the conference to begin its work.
§ Mr. PagetSince the Government's economic failure has imposed upon us the unilateral disarmament which we are seeing on all sides, is there not something to be said for trying to persuade someone else to join in?
§ Mr. LloydI thought that one of the opinions held by hon. Members opposite was that, for example, the Russian reduction in armaments was something to be followed by us. Is the hon. and learned Gentleman saying that that is a failure of Russian economic policy?
§ Mr. BevanThe right hon. and learned Gentleman has suggested that this suggestion is not the wisest way to begin. Would it not be a good thing if the disarmament convention began with a clear statement of what agreement has already been reached in order that we might consider what additional agreement could be reached? Does it follow that it is wise to start off with the maximum confusion and disagreement first, rather than to find out what common ground exists at the beginning and try to add to it later on?
§ Mr. LloydI think that the right hon. Gentleman is perfectly right. Obviously one would attempt to begin this conference by stating the measure of agreement already attained. That is one reason why I propose to attend the first meeting myself. We want to see whether from that we can develop discussions so as to widen agreement.