§ Q3. Mr. Matherasked the Prime Minister to what extent in his recent talks with President Pompidou the defence interests of an enlarged Community were discussed.
§ The Prime MinisterAs I told the House in my statement of 24th May, we had only a brief discussion of defence questions. We both recognised that these were matters for the future, after enlargement if it were to take place.
§ Mr. MatherI am grateful for that reply. Did the Prime Minister receive any undertaking that France would consider rejoining N.A.T.O.? Does he agree that this would be a highly desirable, if not essential, element in any terms agreed, both from the point of view of European security and as an earnest of France's good intentions?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the whole of N.A.T.O. would welcome France's return to the Organisation. She remains a member of the Alliance, but is not a member of the Organisation. These matters were not discussed in detail in the talks between President Pompidou and myself. We accepted that the positions of France and of Britain in defence are different. We are a member of the Organisation and France is not.
§ Mr. EnglishIf the right hon. Gentleman is committed to the unity of Western Europe, as he is, would it not be better to discuss the democratic control of its institutions before discussing, as 858 the right hon. Gentleman put it, matters of future control over its defence?
§ The Prime MinisterThe question of the democratic institutions of the European Economic Community is constantly under discussion, and in the last two years the European Parliament sitting at Strasbourg has increased its influence, and its powers have been widened. I have always made my view plain, which is that if the Community is enlarged the demands for the democratic institutions to increase their powers and influence will continue.
§ Mr. SandysIn view of the growing unwillingness of the United States to bear a disproportionate share of the burden of Western defence, does the Prime Minister agree that the European members of N.A.T.O. should, without delay, endeavour to rationalise their military organisations and standardise their equipment so as to enable them to make a bigger and more effective contribution with the least possible increase in expenditure?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with my right hon. Friend that, in the absence of an international agreement about the disposition of arms, such a movement is desirable. With regard to British policy, last autumn we took the necessary steps to help to strengthen the teeth of N.A.T.O., and then early this year, when we were asked to assist on infrastructure, we were able, in conjunction with the Federal German Government, to come to an arrangement for helping there as well.
§ Q9. Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Prime Minister whether he explained to President Pompidou at his recent meeting with him the processes which would have to be gone through in the United Kingdom to validate any British application to join the European Economic Community.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer the hon. Member to the Statement which I made in the House on 24th May. I am sure that President Pompidou is well aware of the constitutional procedure which we will follow if we accede to the Treaty of Rome.—[Vol. 818, c. 31–49.]
§ Mr. Arthur LewisNeither the previous answer nor this one, nor any other answer which the right hon. Gentleman has given, has explained to President Pompidou or anyone in this country why 859 the people of this country will not be allowed to give their view on this most important subject and the fact that hon. Members will not be allowed the opportunity in future of changing their view, if they wish to do so, as they have been able to do on every other piece of legislation which has ever been introduced. Did he explain that to President Pompidou?
§ The Prime MinisterIt certainly does not lie in my power to prevent hon. Members from changing their minds or their views. It has come to my knowledge that some have already changed their views. I hope that others will remain stalwart in the face of the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. FernyhoughIs the right hon. Gentleman saying that if any of the consequential legislation in respect of our adherence to the Treaty of Rome becomes objectionable, this Parliament will have the right to annul it?
§ The Prime MinisterWhat I am saying is that the procedure for Parliament to ratify a treaty is clearly laid down. If we are to accede to this Treaty, the procedure will then be followed. In connection with the ratification, legislation has then to be passed. That will go through the normal parliamentary processes.