§ 47. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent it remains Her Majesty's Government's policy, as affirmed in the House on 19th February last, to reunite Germany within a framework agreed and guaranteed by the four Powers, to consult Germans from both sides of Germany as to the methods of unification, to make the stage at which free elections should take place in the process of unification a matter for negotiation, and not to regard the acceptance of free elections as a pre-condition for progress of any kind; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydThe views of Her Majesty's Government on how Germany should be reunified are set out in the Western Peace Plan presented at the Geneva Conference in May. It was printed in Cmnd. 797.
§ Mr. ZilliacusWith great respect, that is not a reply to my Question. Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept the three points laid down by the Minister of State on 19th February—first, that Germany should be reunited
within a framework to be agreed and guaranteed by the four Powers"—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] I am quoting. Secondly—It is not our position"—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] I am quoting. I am entitled to quote. We must get an answer to this very important question. [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. If hon. Members will allow the hon. Member to continue I will judge when he gets out of order through the sheer length of his supplementary question, and we shall get on more quickly.
§ Mr. ZilliacusI am still quoting—
German reunification within a framework to be agreed and guaranteed by the four Powers …including free elections … It is not our position that free elections throughout Germany must be the first step in any process leading to reunification and that acceptance of this is a pre-condition for progress of any kind …there must be free elections at tome point, but there is room for negotiation about the exact point at which they should have to take place.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. In the interests of other hon. Members, the hon. Member must make his supplementary question more concise.
Mr. Gresham CookeOn a point of order. Recently, Mr. Speaker, you asked for shorter supplementary questions. The hon. Member's Question takes up seven lines on the Order Paper. Would you make a Ruling that in a supplementary question there should not be more than two questions, and not more than two sentences to any one question?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe Ruling is that a question, whether supplementary or not, should not be of inordinate length.
§ Mr. ZilliacusI am sorry to have to quote this, but the Foreign Secretary evaded my point. He would not answer. The last part of the quotation is:
In our Note of 16th February we proposed that German advisers should be called to the conference from both sides to be consulted, I have no doubt that the method of reunification could be one of the topics upon which their views would be listened to."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th November, 1959; Vol. 600, c. 575.]That is the thing.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Member's supplementary question is of inordinate length. Mr. Hector Hughes, Question No. 48.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIs that still the Government's policy?