HC Deb 15 June 1965 vol 714 cc237-40
Q4. Mr. Zilliacus

asked the Prime Minister to what extent, during his visit to Washington last December, he arrived at an understanding with President Johnson to continue the previous Government's policy of the Anglo-American division of labour in Vietnam and Malaysia, which was mentioned at the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation Council in May.

The Prime Minister

There was no such understanding, no such concept of an international division of labour, and no such reference in the transactions of the meeting of the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation held last month in London.

Mr. Zilliacus

In that case, was not the subject of Vietnam discussed at all in December? If not, when was this Anglo-American division of labour first agreed on?

The Prime Minister

Of course, Vietnam was discussed last December, and indeed I reported certain aspects of the discussion to the House, including the question of British troops in Vietnam and other subjects, but I said in my first Answer that during my discussions with President Johnson there has been no ques- tion of what he calls this international division of labour.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

Is not Question Time an unsatisfactory occasion for discussing this very serious situation in Vietnam, and cannot the Prime Minister stimulate the Leader of the House to give us time for a debate on this matter?

Secondly, can the Prime Minister explain how it is that the Foreign Secretary can find time to go to Oxford with his hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Mr. Warbey) and talk to undergraduates and dons about Vietnam and Government policy, but he cannot, apparently, find time to come to the House and make a statement?

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman seems to forget that my right hon. Friend did come to the House on the last day before Whitsun and make a full and encouraging statement about our attitude in relation to Vietnam.

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the question of a debate is one for the usual channels. We have already given a day for a foreign affairs debate, quite recently. The right hon. Gentleman can always offer a Supply day, and I do not think that I am treading too much on my right hon. Friend's responsibilities when I say we want a debate on foreign affairs, including Vietnam, as soon as it can be arranged.

Mr. Mendelson

In view of recent developments, and the more serious situation in the war in Vietnam—the fuller commitment of the United States forces as direct combatants, and the increased offensive actions of the Vietcong—does not my right hon. Friend consider that a personal initiative on his part is now the order of the day, and would receive the full support of the nation?

The Prime Minister

I want to make it plain that the Government are deeply disturbed about the present position in Vietnam, and the developments of the last two or three weeks. Certain consultations are now going on. I hope that the House will not press me to go into detail about them, because I am sure that the whole House, like the Government, wants these to be fully productive. I hope to make a statement to the House about them very soon.

Mr. Grimond

Arising out of the Prime Minister's last answer, and without pressing for any details of the consultations, may I ask whether he can confirm that as each of these developments takes place in Vietnam we are consulted, together with the other allies of the United States? Can he also say anything about the proposals which the Foreign Secretary let out in his statement to the House before Whitsun?

The Prime Minister

There is another Question on the Order Paper which deals with the right hon. Gentleman's first question, and the short answer is, "Yes, we are in the closest touch about developments of this kind". On the second part of the question, I would prefer to wait until I can make a statement to the House.

Mr. Michael Foot

I appreciate my right hon. Friend's statement that he wishes to make an early further statement on this matter to the House, but can he tell us whether the Government have pressed on the United States Government that their promise of their desire for early negotiation takes into account the possibility of negotiations including representation of the Vietcong at the conference table? Secondly, can my right hon. Friend say whether the Government have urged on the United States Government the desirability of a further cessation of the bombing of North Vietnam in order to make fruitful this possibility of negotiations, which is the only way in which the United States and the Western world can escape from the dilemmas and difficulties of this situation?

The Prime Minister

I always have the problem, as does anyone in this position, of deciding at any moment of time just how much can be told to the House—which one wants to do—and how far it is wise to say as little as possible. During our exchanges at Question Time in February and March I was being strongly pressed about a number of things. I took the line that private consultations were going on. I think that they played a big part in securing the acceptance by a number of our allies of the principle of a conference, which had been very difficult to achieve before. Tempted as I am to try to reply to my hon. Friend, I think that on the whole it would be better to say nothing at this moment while the consultations are going on.

Mr. Longden

Until we can have a debate, will the Prime Minister make his hon. Friends below the Gangway aware of the fact that President Johnson is seeking to compel respect for the obligations arising from a treaty—which is one of the objects of the United Nations Charter—and is also seeking to prevent naked aggression from being seen to pay in a part of the world in which Britain and the Asian and Australasian Commonwealth have vital interests? In the meantime, will the Prime Minister not allow his resolution and that of his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary to be "sicklied o'er" by these fledglings and faint hearts who have learnt nothing from the lessons of the 'thirties?

The Prime Minister

I am sorry that I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman's analysis of the situation so far as the Government and the position in the House are concerned. I cannot really believe that the hon. Gentleman's eloquent little speech and his Shakespearean quotation are really designed to help in this difficult situation. If I thought that they were, I would pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman, but I am afraid that I cannot do so.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. Zilliacus, to ask the next Question.

Mr. Warbey

On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister, in his supplementary answers, has widened the scope of the Question to cover matters included in my Question on the Order Paper, may I have the opportunity of putting a supplementary question to him?

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid not. I should love to go on inviting them, but by doing so we do not get Questions answered.