HC Deb 26 November 1958 vol 596 cc338-9
39. Mr. P. Noel-Baker

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what action Her Majesty's Government propose to take to secure the implementation of Article 23 of the Charter of the United Nations, which provides that the Government of China shall have a permanent seat in the Security Council of the United Nations.

Mr. Ormsby-Gore

Article 23 of the Charter provides that certain States, not Governments, shall be permanent members of the Security Council. These include the "Republic of China". This provision was implemented when the United Nations was established. As the right hon. Member is aware, opinions among members of the United Nations differ as to who now represents China and who should occupy the Chinese seat.

Mr. Noel-Baker

Since Her Majesty's Government recognise that the Government of Peking are the legitimate Government of China, is not it our duty to ensure that the Charter shall be carried out? Are not we condoning a flagrant violation of the Charter until we do so?

Mr. Ormsby-Gore

No, we are not condoning a flagrant violation of the Charter. The reasons why the British Government have not taken the initiative were explained last week at some length by my right hon. and learned Friend.

Mr. Noel-Baker

If the Charter lays down that the Republic of China shall have representation on the Security Council, and Her Majesty's Government recognise the Government of Peking as the legitimate Government of that country, surely we are in violation of the Charter until we see that that is carried out?

Mr. Ormsby-Gore

As has often been pointed out, a number of members of the United Nations will not regard the present Peking Government as the legitimate Government.

Mr. A. Henderson

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is quite farcical to suggest that the de jure Government of 500 million people as against the de facto Government of 11 million Formosans are not qualified under Article 23 to be represented on the Council?

Mr. Ormsby-Gore

As I said earlier, that matter was gone into at some length at Question Time last week.

Back to