HC Deb 13 February 1958 vol 582 cc569-71
46. Mr. Malcolm MacMillan

asked the Prime Minister whether the speech of the President of the Board of Trade at San Francisco on 3rd January proposing an economic merger of the British Commonwealth, Western Europe, and the United States of America represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Mr. R. A. Butler

I have been asked to reply.

My right hon. Friend in the speech referred to in the Question suggested that the free world had to organise its economic resources in response to the challenge from the Sino-Soviet bloc. With this we should all agree.

Mr. MacMillan

Is the acting Prime Minister—the next best Prime Minister or the best next Prime Minister—aware that in fact in his speech the President of the Board of Trade said that we must make this merger or lose all and that he appeared to be making a quite emphatic statement of Government policy and that everybody there understood it to be so? Are the statements which the acting Prime Minister and the President of the Board of Trade have made wholly in accord with the Government's avowed policy of liberalising East-West trade and removing trade barriers throughout the world?

Mr. Butler

My right hon. Friend has already answered three Questions on this subject to the complete satisfaction of the House, and certainly to the absolute satisfaction of Her Majesty's Government, and I have indicated in my response the feature of the speech with which we should all agree, and that is the feature to which I draw the attention of the hon. Member.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Leader of the House aware that the feature of the speech to which my right hon. Friend referred was not the one to which the right hon. Gentleman referred? Does he think it is wholly desirable that the President of the Board of Trade should go around making far-reaching proposals of this kind without anybody being consulted in the Commonwealth or at home? Will he not repudiate the suggestion on the Order Paper?

Mr. Butler

No, Sir. I would do the very reverse of repudiating either the speech or my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. A little imagination and language of the type used by my right hon. Friend is an advantage to the world at large and to international relations.

Mr. Gaitskell

Are we to understand it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government that there should be an economic merger of the British Commonwealth, Western Europe and the United States of America? Can we have a straight answer to that question?

Mr. Butler

The right hon. Gentleman has come to the assistance of his hon. Friend and perhaps the best thing I can do, in order to show the solidarity of my side, is to refer to the Answer I gave, which was that the amalgamation of the organisation of the economic resources of the free world in response to the challenge from the Sino-Soviet bloc could not but be to the advantage of the civilised world.

Mr. Peyton

Does not my right hon. Friend think it rather odd that, with the distinguished exception of the right hon Gentleman the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell), the Socialist Party should take objection to any suggestion for increasing international co-operation?

Mr. Butler

It is an example of one of the more frequent aberrations of the party opposite at the present time.

Mr. Shinwell

Disregarding the challenge of the Soviet bloc, which may be regarded as superfluous in its relevance to this important matter, does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that in the economic sphere there is no country—neither the United Kingdom, nor any of its partners in the Commonwealth—nor the United States, nor any country in Western Europe—which can afford to go it alone? Do not the Government realise that although this was merely an expression of opinion by the right hon. Gentleman, it is the right policy to be pursued by them?

Mr. Butler

I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman that, in the modern world, we cannot afford to go it alone. He has done a service in educating public opinion and his own party.

Mr. MacMillan

In view of the fact that nobody seems to have read the speech referred to in the several Questions that have been asked and the completely unsatisfactory and evasive answers by the deputy Prime Minister, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment, when it may be adequately and correctly answered.