§ Q3. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Prime Minister, in view of the pledge of support he gave to President Johnson's policy of intervention in South Viet-Nam, what policy he stated in regard to North Viet-Nam.
§ Q6. Mr. Rankinasked the Prime Minister, in view of his agreement with President Johnson on South Viet-Nam, what discussions he had with him about a similar arrangement for North Viet-Nam.
§ The Prime MinisterI told the House on 3rd March, in reply to a Question from the hon. Gentleman the Member for Woolwich, East (Mr. Mayhew), that the United States policy for which I reaffirmed support was to help the Republic of Viet-Nam defend its independence. I did not discuss the North.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIs not the Prime Minister aware that the Americans are losing their war of intervention in South Viet-Nam and that the idea is under active consideration of invading North Viet-Nam as the only alternative to accepting defeat? Will he make clear that the Government will wholeheartedly oppose any suggestion of any attack on North Viet-Nam?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot accept the words "war of intervention" in the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. This is American intervention at the request of the South Viet-Namese Government. The second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question escapes me for the moment.
§ Mr. RankinIn view of the fact that the Prime Minister—
§ Mr. ZilliacusMay I repeat the last half of my supplementary question?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I called Mr. Rankin. We will try to get back to the 1518 hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Zillicus) in a moment.
§ Mr. RankinIn view of the fact that the Prime Minister has given complete support to American policy in South Viet-Nam, will he assure us that we are not thereby committed to support American policy in North Viet-Nam?
§ The Prime MinisterThat reminds me of the second part of the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Gorton. Mr. Rusk has made quite clear that the United States Government have not taken any such decision, so the question does not arise.
§ Mr. F. M. BennettHas the Prime Minister noted, regarding the pledge of support from this country, that the Leader of the Opposition has just given an exactly similar pledge in America, which has much gratified the American administration?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is not for me to make the right hon. Gentleman's views clear.
Mr. H. WilsonSince the right hon. Gentleman seems to think it becoming in a Prime Minister to repeat a completely false statement and to add some of his own to it, and since outside this House I intend to ask him to produce chapter and verse and timing for the allegation which he made this morning or withdraw his allegation—[HON. MEMBERS: "Cheating. Dirty politics."]—we can deal—[Laughter.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. If the House conducts a class in semaphore, we shall make very little progress.
Mr. WilsonWill the right hon. Gentleman—I wanted him to be able to listen to this—now come back to the question of South Viet-Nam? Does he confirm that, last Saturday, the President of the United States said that no decision would be taken about future Viet-Nam policy until Mr. McNamara's visit to Saigon next week, but will he make clear, as others, including myself, have done, the advice which, I am sure, we would all want to give against those in Washington who are proposing an invasion of North Viet-Nam as a way of aiding the situation in South Viet-Nam?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not know who the people are in Washington who 1519 —[Interruption.] Perhaps hon. Members opposite know who these people are in Washington who are proposing to invade North Viet-Nam. I do not. All I can say in reply to the right hon. Gentleman is that we have given no such support to any such idea.
Mr. WilsonThat is gratifying. Would the right hon. Gentleman do better, in seeking information from Washington, to base his information on what his own Embassy can tell him and not rely on the Evening Standard?
§ The Prime MinisterPerhaps to save the right hon. Gentleman the trouble of any—[Interruption.]—I think that the right hon. Gentleman wants to know my view. I do not know what the right hon. Gentleman said in Washington. I dare say none of us will ever know. What did happen—the right hon. Gentleman was away and he may not have known about this—was that great headlines appeared to the effect that he had said something. What it was he must explain.
Mr. WilsonWould the Prime Minister ask his officers in the Embassy, who were present at all the statements which I made in Washington—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—certainly. Will he ask them the date on which I made the speech which this morning he alleged I made, and will he then find that he was totally wrong in what he said this morning and that no speech on Viet-Nam or any other question was made by me in Washington or anywhere else in the United States until after this particular he had come to the United Kingdom and been denied? In view of the fact that he said this morning that I made a speech, found it unpopular and retracted it, will the right hon. Gentleman now withdraw?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the right hon. Gentleman says that he did not say these things in a speech and I have insinuated that he did, of course I withdraw it, naturally. That is the thing to do. But we still have to have explained these extraordinary headlines which came to us—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. W. HamiltonOn a point of order. Is it—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I wish to hear what is being addressed to me on a point of order.
§ Mr. HamiltonI wish to ask whether it is in order for the Prime Minister, or indeed any other Minister, to ask the Leader of the Opposition, or any other Member of the House, to deny or confirm headlines in a newspaper.
§ Mr. SpeakerI do not think that any point of order arises on that.
§ Mr. SpeakerI have not yet finished what I was saying. What was in order was matter arising out of some answers relating to South Viet-Nam. That was all that was about.
§ Mr. HamiltonI was simply relating my question to the remark of the Prime Minister when he asked my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition to explain a headline in a newspaper. You yourself, Mr. Speaker, have repeatedly intervened when Members have been asked to confirm or deny newspaper reports, saying that this was not the function of any Member of the House.
§ Mr. SpeakerThis will sound funny, but it is none the less strictly accurate. That rule applies to Parliamentary Questions to Ministers but not to Ministers' answers. That is the fact.