§ Mr. Bevan (by Private Notice)asked the Prime Minister whether he has any statement to make on his recent talks with Dr. Adenauer.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)My talks with the German Chancellor were confidential. I would, however, like to say this about his visit. Among the subjects discussed with Chancellor Adenauer were preparations for the forthcoming Summit Meeting, Germany and Berlin, disarmament, and the political and economic relationships of Western Europe. The result of our talks on these subjects was to confirm that there were no differences between the objectives which both of us were trying to attain.
§ Mr. BevanDid the right hon. Gentleman have any specific exchanges with Dr. Adenauer about the proposals which he discussed in Moscow with Mr. Khrushchev about an area of disengagement in Central Europe or a limitation 205 of arms in a specific area? Secondly, did the right hon. Gentleman discuss the Oder-Neisse line? Thirdly, did he make proposals to Dr. Adenauer about a West German contribution to funds for underdeveloped areas?
§ The Prime MinisterOur policy for controlling armaments in an agreed area in Central Europe is set out in the Western proposals which were put forward at the Geneva Conference in May. These were worked out in conjunction with our allies after my visit to Moscow and they are wholly consistent with the communiqué which was issued after the Moscow visit. They are to be found in Command Paper 797.
§ The Prime MinisterWith regard to the right hon. Gentleman's second question, I did not discuss that matter. As to the third question, it is a subject which came into our discussions.
§ Mr. BevanIt there not a great deal of opinion in many countries of the West that as Western Germany has been relieved of a very considerable burden of aims in the course of the last ten years or more, and has had very great help in the development of her economy, it is reasonable to expect her to make a generous contribution to funds for underdeveloped areas?
§ The Prime MinisterIf we are able to work out some joint effort I hope that the German Government will make their contribution.
§ Mr. WarbeyDoes the Prime Minister's reference to the Western so-called peace plan mean that it is wrapped up again in a tight package and that any question of a zone of limited arms in Central Europe is made conditional again on prior acceptance of reunification on Dr. Adenauer's terms?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. If the hon. Member will look at it, he will see that there is no inconsistency between the May position of the joint agreement with the allies and the communiqué issued after my visit to Moscow.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanCould the Prime Minister, without betraying to the House anything that was confidential between 206 him and Dr. Adenauer, still assure the House that he is under no kind of obligation, either to Dr. Adenauer or anybody else, that would prevent him, at the Summit Conference, from considering proposals for a disengagement area in Europe on their merits? Can he assure us that there is no prior obligation on his part that would prevent his so doing?
§ The Prime MinisterI have always made it clear that we are opposed to what is called disengagement. We have said that we are in favour of geographical areas of inspection and ceilings on arms throughout the world. This, in our view, is a sound conception.
§ Mr. ShinwellIf the Prime Minister's purpose, as it no doubt is, is to promote stability in Europe, would it not have been wise to have extracted an assurance from Dr. Adenauer in these conversations on the lines of General de Gaulle's declaration on the Oder-Neisse line?
§ The Prime MinisterThe object of these visits is to have discussions. They are confidential. They are freely entered into and they are preparatory to discussions which we shall have in Paris with the Western Powers, and I hope that these will be preparatory to a Summit Conference. I do not think that it would be in the interest of or of value to these discussions if I were asked to give a detailed account of everything that we discuss.
§ Mr. E. FletcherWould the Prime Minister say that nothing that results from the conversations with Dr. Adenauer would prevent discussion about the future status of Berlin at the Summit Conference?
§ The Prime MinisterAll our views upon that are laid down as we discussed it before the May conference, and we take up the discussion where the Foreign Ministers' conference ended.
§ Mr. GaitskellDid the right hon. Gentleman discuss with Dr. Adenauer the advisability and possibility of a temporary agreement on Berlin?
Reverting to the proposed zone of controlled disarmament in Central Europe, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, when he discussed this with Mr. Khrushchev, it was then 207 considered to be part of a general agreement covering a lot of other things as well, or was it not regarded as something which might be handled on its own—an initiative which might lead to progress later in other directions?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. It was clear when we discussed it, and it is said in the communiqué, that
They considered that such negotiations could lay the foundations for a stable system of European security.
§ Mr. GaitskellThe right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question. I asked whether, when he discussed these proposals with Mr. Khrushchev, there was any reference whatsoever to a so-called package deal, or was it not something helpful which might lead to other things but which was not dependent on other political opinions?
§ The Prime MinisterIt was always understood that this subject would be part of the whole German problem.