U.S.S.R. (FINANCIAL AND PROPERTY CLAIMS) (Hansard, 23 January 1968)

§ Q1. Mr. Blaker
asked the Prime Minister what progress has been made in finalising the Agreement reached between him and Mr. Kosygin in February, 1967, en the settlement of mutual financial and property claims between Great Britain and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

§ The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. George Brown)
I have been asked to reply.
As the House knows, the Agreement was signed on 5th January.

§ Mr. Blaker
Why have the Government agreed to pay over to the Soviet Government £500,000 from the assets in this country, which would otherwise have been available to help meet the claims of the British claimants? Are not the British claims bigger than the Soviet claims? If any such payment were to be made, should not it have been the other way around?

§ Mr. Brown
No, Sir. I think that everybody who really thinks about this will realise that it was a very good business to get this Agreement out and to be able to settle it as we have for all the claimants, and that the payment out to the Soviet Union was very well worth doing.

§ Mr. Heath
In order that the House can form a judgment about this, will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for the break-up of the respective claims to be published in the OFFICIAL REPORT, showing how the final conclusion was reached? Will he give the House the exact date on which the gold which had been deposited here by the central banks 210 of the three countries concerned was exchanged—shall we say—for Treasury bonds? Does he still recognise the claim of the central banks on this gold?

§ Mr. Brown
I shall certainly arrange for the date on which the gold was, as the right hon. Gentleman delicately puts it, "exchanged" to be published, and I shall certainly consider the question of the break-up. My immediate reaction is that I see no reason why I should not publish that, but I should like to consider it. The third question was?——

§ Mr. Heath
Does the right hon. Gentleman still recognise the claims of the central banks on the gold?

§ Mr. Brown
No, Sir. I think that this must be regarded as a settlement of the whole thing.

§ Sir T. Beamish
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the proposed Agreement seems to quite a number of people morally and legally doubtful? Since it must be subject to Parliamentary approval, will he say why the £500,000 has already been deposited in the Bank of England to the credit of the Soviet Union without Parliament being consulted?

§ Mr. Brown
The Agreement will be subject in due course to Parliamentary approval. If Parliament turns it down, that will be that. Our own judgment— and we are for the moment the Government—[Laughter.]—for the moment and for a long time to come—is that this is a very good Agreement and that it was well worth getting out in this way.

§ Sir Alec Douglas-Home
It is true that the other three countries have been absorbed into the Soviet Union. Should they by any chance regain their nationality at some future point, would the right hon. Gentleman consider, before Parliament discusses this again, whether the debt could not be honoured in those circumstances?

§ Mr. Brown
The right hon. Gentleman has been much longer in my job than I have. He is therefore much better able to assess possible eventualities. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] In that situation I repeat to him that he would have liked to be able to make this Agreement.