§ 41. Mr. Donnellyasked the Prime Minister whether the speech by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the Annual Meeting of Wirral Division Women Conservatives at Meols, Cheshire, on Saturday, 2nd April, concerning United Nations policy towards the Union of South Africa, represented the policy of Her Majesty's Government.
§ Mr. R. A. ButlerI have been asked to reply.
Yes, Sir.
§ Mr. DonnellyIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that parts of that speech were good but that parts of it were not so good? Can the right hon. Gentleman say at what point the doctrine of non-intervention in the affairs of a country applies at the United Nations when those internal affairs of that country constitute a threat to peace in the surrounding area?
§ Mr. ButlerThis matter was most seriously considered by the Government, and I think that the statement made by Sir Pierson Dixon on that occasion is correct, that we came to the conclusion 563 that the Resolution goes beyond the scope of the proper functions of the Council. As to the hon. Member's reference to the speech, I am glad to have part-praise of it from the hon. Gentleman. I think it was a very good speech and explained the situation accurately.
§ Mr. WadeIn the case of South-West Africa, over which the Union was given a mandate, would the right hon. Gentleman agree that it cannot seriously be contended that the inhabitants of that area are the domestic concern of the Union only? In view of the very grave events in South Africa, have the Government any proposals to put forward for safeguarding the inhabitants of that mandated territory, and do the Government intend to change the policy of the representative of the Government at the United Nations if and when this subject is raised again?
§ Mr. ButlerI answered a series of Questions on this on behalf of the Prime Minister some days ago. I drew attention to the fact that this lies largely within the jurisdiction and present competence of the United Nations. When the matter comes up I shall be only too pleased to give an account of the Government's attitude.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanDoes not the right hon. Gentleman consider that the Government's attitude at the United Nations is in a certain degree self-contradictory, since they appear to have not opposed the discussion in the Security Council and, therefore, to have conceded that the discussion was within its competence? Having conceded that, would it not have been better to have given the Security Council the benefit of such a speech as the Prime Minister made in Cape Town—and at home?
§ Mr. ButlerOur delegate, on the occasion of agreeing that the matter should be inscribed, made a particular reservation in relation to the actual words of the Charter of the United Nations. I think that what we have done was exactly right in a very difficult situation and that we have made clear how deeply we feel about these matters and equally how strongly we feel that the Charter of the United Nations should be respected.