§ 9. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's vote at the United Nations to unseat Nationalist China.
§ Mr. GodberI would refer my hon. Friend to the statement I made on this mater in the debate in the House on 4th November.—[Vol. 825, c. 480–1.]
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonWhile the seating of Peking has long been British policy, is not this a matter in which it might have been more appropriate for the Government to stand by the United States Government? Will the Government endeavour to assure the position of Taiwan, with whom we have valuable trade and friendly dealings?
§ Mr. GodberMy hon. Friend is perhaps under some misunderstanding. One could not seat Peking without the resultant effect that Taiwan would be excluded, simply because both Governments insisted on calling themselves the Government of China, and only one could represent China. Therefore, the Government's position on this matter has been consistent throughout the last 10 years.