§ Q4. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Prime Minister whether he will inform President Johnson on his forthcoming visit that the Government dissociates itself from and condemns the practice of saturation bombing of open towns and villages in South Vietnam with the use of napalm and splinter bombs against civilians, including women and children.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to a supplementary question from my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot) on 21st June.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIs it my right hon. Friend's contention that acts of this kind by regular forces of an alleged civilised Power are legitimate as reprisals against atrocities performed by irregulars who are not bound by the laws of war?
§ The Prime MinisterI said when this was last discussed in the House that of course as long as this cruel war continues there will be terrible acts of this kind from all sides. Of course, if my hon. Friend is standing on the position about irregulars not being bound by the rules of war, he has still to explain the massive infiltration into South Vietnam of North Vietnam regular forces.
§ Mr. LongdenHas the Prime Minister any evidence whatever that there has been any saturation bombing of open towns, or of any of the things alleged in this Question, or that there has been anything other than the bombing of supply lines and essential supplies which are normal operations of war?
§ The Prime MinisterOf course, there are many different accounts coming out of Vietnam of what is happening. I have never seen any evidence about saturation bombing of open towns, certainly—[HON. MEMBERS: "Say so."] I am doing. I am sure the House will recognise that if on every inaccurate Question from either side of the House I spent half my answering denying alleged facts for which hon. Members must bear responsibility, I should never get my answer out.
§ Mr. KershawIn view of the fact that the Prime Minister says that there is no evidence of saturation bombing, ought the Table to have accepted this Question?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe Question was in order.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter at the earliest opportunity on the Adjournment.
§ Q5. Dr. David Kerrasked the Prime Minister if he will make the arrangements necessary to enable treatment to be provided in the United Kingdom for Vietnamese children suffering from napalm burns.
§ The Prime MinisterSuch arrangements have already been made in a few cases but in general I think it is better for sick and injured children to be treated in their own country in familiar surroundings. As my hon. Friend will know, we are now establishing a strong 667 pediatric team to work in the Saigon Children's Hospital and this should enable many hundreds of Vietnamese children to receive skilled care and attention.
§ Dr. KerrWhile thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that the pediatric team which has gone to Saigon is not one which is equipped to deal with napalm burns? Is he aware that the Swiss team, representing an organisation called Terre des Hommes, looked at this problem and was appalled at the need for treatment which will not be satisfied by the help which we are currently giving? In the name of common humanity, will my right hon. Friend look at this question again with a view to helping in this respect?
§ The Prime MinisterI have said that these arrangements have been made in some special cases, but if this problem is to continue—we all know why it is continuing—we shall certainly need on an international basis better measures for treatment in Saigon and in Vietnam itself.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingWill the Prime Minister also consider sending a team to the Yemen so that it can treat civilians and children suffering from the effects of napalm bombs dropped by Nasser's forces?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is a different question, but if the hon. Member puts it down I shall give an answer to it.
§ Q8. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Prime Minister whether he will adopt as the policy of Her Majesty's Government and propose to President Johnson in Washington a cease-fire and a halt to military build-ups in Vietnam, and the convocation of a new Geneva Conference with the participation of the National Liberation Front or a South Vietnam coalition including the National Liberation Front with the object of seeking negotiations on the methods and time-table for the withdrawal of foreign forces and North Vietnamese forces from South Vietnam followed, when the process of withdrawal was half completed, by negotiations on the implementation of the 1954 Geneva Agreements.
§ The Prime MinisterOur policy is to try to bring about a negotiated settlement by bringing the parties to the conference table for unconditional negotiations.
§ Mr. ZilliacusDoes not my right hon. Friend recognise that unconditional negotiations with a large American force still in South Vietnam would leave the North Vietnamese open to American demands for partition backed with threats of renewing the war if they refused?
§ The Prime MinisterThe United States Administration have said time and time again that they are prepared to enter unconditional negotiations. Unconditional means unconditional and does not involve laying anyone open to any threats. My hon. Friend should now direct his very considerable abilities to trying to persuade other people to come to the conference table for similar unconditional discussions.