§ Q9. Mr. Patrick Jenkinasked the Prime Minister whether the public speech made by the Foreign Secretary in London on 25th January on Great Britain and the European community represents Government policy.
§ Q13. Sir G. de Freitasasked the Prime Minister whether the public speech made by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on 26th January at a luncheon given by the Federal Trust for Education and Research in London about this country and the European Common Market represents Government policy.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Mr. JenkinWill the Prime Minister recognise that the Foreign Secretary's speech on that occasion was regarded by representatives of the Common Market who were present to hear him as evidence of advance from 1958 to 1961? I suppose that one must welcome this progress in the 15 months which the right hon. 616 Gentleman has held his office, but does not he think that it is time the Government came up to 1966 and made a firm pledge to join the European Community?
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend said exactly what is the right position on 25th January, 1966. He stated, on the basis of what we had said in 1962, what the conditions were. He said that some were now in the process of being realised. He said that we would join if we could get the right conditions to safeguard British interests. I hope that all hon. Members would agree that we should join if we can get the right conditions to safeguard British interests.
§ Mr. HeathIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that since—[Interruption.]—I am grateful for the support of hon. Members opposite. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since the Foreign Secretary made his statement—which we recognise was intended to be helpful—the Community has reconciled its differences without any change whatever in the Treaty of Rome, and that far from abandoning its agricultural policy it is now proceeding to develop it further? Will the Prime Minister therefore make a clear declaration of intent, to be backed by the Foreign Secretary, that he accepts the Treaty of Rome and also accepts the development of the agricultural policy? Unless he does this his statements towards Europe are meaningless.
§ The Prime MinisterI do not want to compete with the right hon. Member. No statement could be more meaningless than the one he made on his Commonwealth tour, if correctly reported in the British Press. It seems that his enthusiasm to get into Europe diminishes the further he gets from Europe. But I welcome the renewed interest of the right hon. Gentleman in this subject, because in their election manifesto last lime Europe was hardly mentioned by the Conservatives. The right hon. Gentleman, the then Prime Minister—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The House seems to be forgetting that it likes the cut and thrust of debate. I want to hear it.
§ The Prime MinisterThe then Prime Minister called it a dead duck at that time. However, the position is, as we have said, that we will go in if we get the right terms. I believe that what the 617 right hon. Gentleman asks is for unconditional entry into Europe. I have warned him time and time again that the agricultural policy as it is—and perhaps still more if it is developed—would be very prejudicial to our interests, to the import bill, the cost of living, and trade with the Commonwealth. This is one of the things that we would have to be totally satisfied about before giving any unconditional commitment of the kind that he, when in Europe, seems willing to give.
§ Sir G. de FreitasSince this speech was made in London while the Council of Europe was meeting in Strasbourg and was, on the whole, well received by our friends and Members of Parliament from both the Six and the E.F.T.A. countries, will the Prime Minister encourage the Foreign Secretary to make such important speeches in Strasbourg in future?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is a fair point. If my right hon. Friend were in Strasbourg I am sure that he would want to deal with this situation very fully, but he was invited to make this speech in London. It has been generally well received, although some Members have tried to read more into it than was actually said.
§ Mr. GrimondCan the Prime Minister say whether all the principles laid down by the late Hugh Gaitskell about going into Europe still apply?
§ The Prime MinisterThey were commended by him in a very memorable speech, but it was not only his own view; it was the view of a large majority at the Labour Party conference. The five conditions certainly still apply, but, as my right hon. Friend has said, through the passage of events the difficulties of getting some of them achieved are now much less, particularly, for example, the first one—the problem of protecting the other E.F.T.A. countries.
§ Mr. ShinwellDoes my right hon. Friend recall that at the last election the Opposition said hardly a word about this, and did not make it an issue? Does he also recall that the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition failed in the negotiations for Britain's entry into E.E.C.? Why should we pull the chestnuts out of the fire for him?
§ The Prime MinisterOn the first part of my right hon. Friend's supplementary question, I once quoted in the House the anodyne remarks in the Conservative Party manifesto, on which they seem to be trying to build now. But their leader described the whole issue, 16 months ago, as a dead duck. I join with the Leader of the Opposition in welcoming the fact that in the recent discussions in Luxembourg the Five and France have come much closer together. All of us, on both sides of the House, when we discussed this question several times before Christmas, felt that, while we did not want to take sides between the Five and the One, we had a common interest in hoping for the kind of result now achieved. We welcome what happened in Luxembourg.
§ Mr. HeathIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that if he looks at the reports of my speech at the Press conference in Kuala Lumpur, to which he referred, he will find no weakening of my position towards Europe? Secondly, is he aware that by his Answer this afternoon he has made it absolutely clear—and the House is grateful to him for this—that tie conditions that he is laying down make it quite impossible for him to negotiate with the European Community?
§ The Prime MinisterI shall be glad to see a much fuller account of that Press conference. I have seen only what the British Press took out of it, and we have all suffered from that ourselves. I am not complaining about that. The only condition that I have laid down was that British interests must be safeguarded, and I should have thought that the whole House would accept that—even the right hon. Gentleman, in his more constructive moments. As for the specific issue, namely, the effect of the Community's agricultural policy on our import bill, the cost of living and Commonwealth trade, I would have hoped that even the right hon. Gentleman would have shown some concern about it, and would not have gone rushing into commitments of which he has not yet understood the full implications.
§ Mr. JenkinIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That was rather an anticlimax.