§ 45. Mr. P. Noel-Bakerasked the Lord Privy Seal whether he will make a statement about the latest developments in Laos, and at the Laos Conference in Geneva.
§ Mr. HeathThere has been no change in the military situation since my statement in the House on 15th May. The Geneva Conference remains in being, 31 but it can make no further progress until a Laotian delegation representing a Government of National Unity is present.
My noble Friend the Foreign Secretary saw Prince Souvanna Phouma on Saturday morning and thoroughly endorsed his efforts to secure a coalition government of a united Laos. Prince Souvanna Phouma is now on his way to Laos, where he hopes in the near future to have another meeting with the other two Princes and General Phoumi.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerHas the Lord Privy Seal seen the article written from Laos last week by Angus Maude? Can he assure us that Prince Boun Oum, who has frustrated the formation of a Government of national unity for so long, is no longer receiving arms from the United States Central Intelligence Agency?
§ Mr. HeathAs I have stated before, I am not responsible for the operation of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. We have no responsibility for it and I cannot give information about anything which may be going on. What is true is that we know that the United States Government are using all the influence they can with Prince Boun Oum and General Phoumi to bring about a Government of national union in Laos, and the British Government have supported all these efforts.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerSince what happens is determined by whether Prince Boun Oum receives arms or not, as has been made plain by The Times messages quoting diplomats in Laos in recent weeks, can the Government assure us that they have made representations to the United States Government that this supply of arms should stop?
§ Mr. HeathThe British Government have been in close touch with the United States Government in order to bring these three princes together. The fact is that General Phoumi's forces were routed at Nam Tha and obviously his military position has suffered in consequence.
§ Mr. GaitskellWhile accepting that it is the desire of the British and American Governments to see the establishment of a genuinely neutral Government in Laos, would not the right hon. 32 Gentleman agree that to achieve this a recalling of the Geneva Conference might be desirable? Is it not unsatisfactory that that Conference cannot apparently be recalled until there is first single real Laos representation there?
§ Mr. HeathWith respect, the Geneva Conference is still in being and those representing the delegations are there. As I told the House, it has completed its work and set out a possible agreement which only requires the signature of a United Government of Laos. The question is whether that Conference can play any part in restoring the cease-fire in Laos. I think that the situation at the moment is that there is no further military activity going on in Laos.
§ Mr. RidsdaleIs my right hon. Friend aware that we on this side of the House welcome the initiative of the Government over the last year in attempting to form a neutral Government in Laos?
§ Mr. ShinwellIf, as the right hon. Gentleman said, there is no change in the military situation in Laos, are we to understand that Thailand is not in danger of aggression from that quarter, and in those circumstances will the Government abandon this idea of sending forces there?
§ Mr. HeathWhen I said that there was no change in the situation, I covered the period in which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced the offer of Her Majesty's Government for part of the Royal Air Force to go to Thailand if the Thai Government so requested.
Mr. H. WilsonWhen, in answer to my right hon. Friend, the right hon. Gentleman referred to the situation in Geneva, is it not a fact that last January agreement was reached in Geneva on the formation of a neutralist Government, and that as part of that operation Prince Boun Oum and General Phoumi Nosavan agreed that the disputed portfolio should be placed at the disposal of Souvanna Phouma, and has not most of the trouble since then been due to the failure of Boun Oum and his colleagues to honour the agreement that was worked out at Geneva? Since it is American and British policy that the 33 Geneva Conference decision be upheld, should not there now be even more pressure on those holding up the agreement in Laos to accept what was settled in Geneva?
§ Mr. HeathThe right hon. Gentleman is always asking me to apportion blame between the three different parties in Laos as to why a national Government has not been agreed upon. Both the right hon Gentleman and I know the difficulties in the formation of Governments of different kinds, and I do not wish to say that any one of the princes is in particular responsible for a hold-up in forming a Government. I have seen enough disagreement about who should hold portfolios in this Government of national union to know that it is impossible to apportion blame on to one side.
Mr. HendersonWould the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that the action taken by the United States Government does not in any way conflict with the responsibility of the Security Council to investigate, under Article 34, any situation which may lead to international friction?
§ Mr. WarbeyCan the Lord Privy Seal confirm that during the last few days General Phoumi has been in Formosa in order to seek military support for the continuation of his civil war, and has secured an agreement with General Chiang Kai-shek that Nationalist Chinese forces still at present in Laos and Thailand shall be used on his side?
§ Mr. HeathI have seen reports that General Phoumi has visited Formosa, but I have no knowledge of any agreement such as that which the hon. Member alleges to have been made.