§ 21. Mr. Warbeyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now in a position to state the policy of the Government regarding the reconvening of the International Commission for Supervision and Control in Laos.
§ 25 and 26. Mr. Rankinasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) if he will take the steps necessary for reconvening the International Commission for Laos;
(2) what action he is taking as co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference on 423 Indo-China to deal with the situation created by the disregard now being shown by the Government of Laos towards the Geneva Agreements; and if he will make a statement on this matter.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreFor a full statement of the position, I would refer the hon. Gentlemen to the answers my hon. Friend gave on 8th and 10th June. The Government of Laos have not disregarded the Geneva Agreements and we do not consider that the International Commission should be reconvened against their wishes.
§ Mr. WarbeyCan the Minister of State say why in his replies to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) and myself he concealed from the House and the country the fact that Mr. Nehru has urged the reconvening of the International Commission for Laos? In view of the fact that the Indian Government regard the presence of the International Commission as a guarantee of peace and stability in South-East Asia, does the right hon. Gentleman not regard that as a powerful argument for supporting the Indian Government instead of doing nothing again?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreIt is quite wrong to suggest that we have tried to mislead the House in any way. It is well known that the Indian Government have pressed for a reconvening of the International Commission. What we said we would not do was to publish the text of Mr. Nehru's statement to the British Government, for obvious reasons. It is, of course, also true that the Canadian Government, who form part of the International Commission, also do not think that it would be useful to reconvene the Commission at the present time.
§ Mr. RankinIs it not the case that the International Commissions are not supposed to be disbanded until there has been a political settlement covering the whole of Indo-China? As that has not yet been achieved—for example, no elections have yet been held in Vietnam—will not the right hon. Gentleman consider the matter again?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThe Question relates to the International Commission for Laos. It was postponed sine die last 424 July and it is not proposed to reconvene it.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerIn view of the very great services rendered by the Indian Government, both in Indo-China and in Korea, ought we not to pay attention to the desires of Mr. Nehru?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreWe have, of course, paid the very greatest attention to what he has had to say. There has, however, been considerable exaggeration from the Communist side regarding the events that have been taking place in Laos.
§ Mr. Speaker rose—
§ Mr. RankinOn a point of order. I had two Questions—
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member asked a very comprehensive supplementary question.
§ Mr. RankinNo, Mr. Speaker. My supplementary question—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.