§ Mr. WarbeyI beg to ask leave, Mr. Speaker, to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely,
the failure of Her Majesty's Government to take immediate action, through the United250Nations, to stop the new acts of war now being planned and committed in and against the people and the sovereign State of Vietnam in pursuance of the newly-announced decisions of the Government of the United States of America.To make my case for a prima facie ruling in favour of an urgent debate I have to show that the matter is definite and urgent, that it arises out of a partly new situation and that it involves the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government.That the matter is definite is clear from the wording of my proposal. I do not think that anybody would doubt that acts of war are being planned or committed in or against the State of Vietnam.
As to whether or not there have been any new developments in the situation, I must take into account the fact that—and I regret that the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition has left the Chamber—
§ Mr. WarbeyI shall be making a specific reference to the Leader of the Opposition since, in so far as there is a continuing situation in Vietnam, it arises to a large extent out of commitments entered into by the Leader of the Opposition when he was—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman may make his application if he pleases, but he cannot make it an occasion for attacks upon other hon. or right hon. Gentlemen.
§ Mr. WarbeyWith respect, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition made an attack on me during Question Time and has now left the Chamber. This is quite germane to the Motion, because it is germane to the question whether or not this is a continuing situation and whether there have been any significant new developments and changes in the situation. I was merely saying that there is a continuing element arising out of the commitments made by the previous Government.
I submit that there have been significant new developments which have actually taken place while the House was in recess. These new developments amount to a public statement by the United States Government that the 251 American forces in Vietnam are to be used—indeed, are being used—in a combat rôle in Vietnam. The statement—and I have the text of the official White House statement with me—is to the effect that the primary rôle of these troops is to defend American air bases and other installations. Of course, the establishment of such installations is in itself an act of war.
Secondly, the defence of those installations by foreign troops is an act of war. Thirdly, the permission given to the American commander to use those troops to make war against the forces of the Liberation front in South Vietnam is also an act or threat of war. In addition, the Americans have announced that they are to build a naval base at Cam Ranh in South Vietnam. This, also, is a new development.
Finally, the latest new development is that there has been in the last day or two an overthrow of the civilian Government in Saigon by a military coup d'état and its replacement by a puppet military régime which has no authority over the country, which has no popular support and which, therefore, is not a legitimate Government capable of calling upon the American forces for assistance.
This, I say, is the answer to the point made by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary in his written reply to my Question yesterday. These are four new elements, and I therefore raise them at the first opportunity.
It is clear that Her Majesty's Government have certain responsibilities in this matter. They have already accepted a general responsibility for the activities of the S.E.A.T.O. Council and of S.E.A.T.O. in this area. They have accepted a responsibility for endeavouring to engage in peace-making activities in Vietnam. They have also a general responsibility before the United Nations to call the attention of the United Nations—hon. Members opposite do not appear to be particularly interested in a matter—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Let there be no bothers of that sort. Let the hon. Member make his application.
§ Mr. WarbeyI hope that hon. Members opposite will recognise that the whole of the British people are concerned at this 252 moment about the possibility that Britain, if we are not very careful, might before long be engaged in a war in South East Asia, and a war on the wrong side—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] If hon. Members opposite do not like that remark, they will have the opportunity to say so when we debate the matter—
§ Mr. SpeakerYes, but the hon. Gentleman must not say things like that until we have the opportunity of debate. If he will allow me to say so, he should not now make the speech that he could make were his application to be acceded to.
§ Mr. WarbeyI recognise that, Mr. Speaker, but I have to make my case that there is a need for an urgent debate on this matter, and that it is not something that can be postponed. I have to make the case that Her Majesty's Government have a responsibility to act rightly in this matter. They have, in fact, not acted rightly, because, in the first place, in view of the fact that breaches of international peace have been committed in Vietnam, and are threatened not only in Vietnam, but in the surrounding areas, they have a clear duty, as a member of the Security Council of the United Nations, to refer this matter at the earliest opportunity to the United Nations so that the Security Council can decide upon the appropriate action to put an end to these acts of aggression or breaches of the peace.
It is the failure of Her Majesty's Government to take steps which necessitates an immediate debate so that this course can be urged upon them. It is too long to wait another week until we discuss the matter, because during the week of delay the prestige and authority of the United Nations itself will be weakened, as, also, will be the prestige and authority of Her Majesty's Government. I do not want to see either of those things happen, nor does this House, nor, I believe, do the people of this country.
It is for that reason that I take the view—and I hope that you will take the view, Mr. Speaker—that this is a matter which requires urgent debate which should take place this day.
§ Mr. SpeakerPerhaps the hon. Gentleman will be good enough to bring me his Motion.
253 The hon. Member seeks leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely:
the failure of Her Majesty's Government to take immediate action, through the United Nations, to stop the new acts of war now being planned and committed in and against the people and the sovereign State of Vietnam in pursuance of the newly-announced decisions of the Government of the United States of America.I fully understand the anxieties of the hon. Gentleman, but I could not hold that to be within the Standing Order, save in defiance of precedent.
§ Mr. WarbeyWith respect, Mr. Speaker, perhaps you would be kind enough to enlarge upon that Ruling, because you referred to my anxieties in the matter. My anxieties, I may say—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I referred to the hon. Gentleman's anxieties out of courtesy, and to indicate my sympathy with him. I do not propose to elaborate my reasons. If he looks back at the 1959 Report on Procedure he will see in page xix what the Committee thought about some of the restrictions on the Speaker's discretion in those matters which have been effected by precedent. It suggested, indeed, that where action in pursuance of United Nations obligations arose the practice might be loosened up, but the House refrained from adopting that suggestion, so I am bound by what the Ruling was before. I do not propose to elaborate it more than that, because it is familiar.