HL Deb 10 March 1959 vol 214 cc846-50

2.34 p.m.

LORD KILLEARN

My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government (1) by what right or authority not only for themselves but on behalf of United Kingdom nationals they have declared in Article IV (5) of the Anglo-Egyptian Agreement of February 28th that the payment prescribed in that Agreement "fully and finally discharges the Government of the united Arab Republic" and their nationals "from all liability to the United Kingdom Government and United Kingdom nationals"; and (2) whether British subjects holding claims against Egypt arising out of the Suez incident were consulted in any form before the undertaking was given by Her Majesty's Government on their behalf.]

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, as the noble Lord must be aware, it is a well-established practice, where a foreign Government has expropriated British property, for Her Majesty's Government to achieve the best settlement possible and in arriving at that settlement to waive the claims of their nationals.

As my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in reply to a Question in another place on March 3, the general issues arising in the financial negotiations with Egypt were discussed at a series of meetings between representatives of the Departments concerned and the representatives of persons and organisations with interests in Egypt. It would not have been practicable, however, to consult such persons and organisations at every stage in the negotiations.

LORD KILLEARN

My Lords, while thanking the noble and learned Viscount the Minister for his Answer, on which I do not propose to make detailed comment, may I ask him to cast his memory back to what he said in this House on February 25—that is, just three days before the agreement was signed? When I then asked him whether what he had then said to me was liable to allay the fear of British claimants, the noble and learned Viscount ended with these words [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 214 (No. 43), col. 492]: I am sure the noble Lord"— that is, myself— will do his best to allay any alarm … because I can assure him that the alarm is not, at any rate in my judgment, well founded. Does the noble and learned Viscount repeat and confirm that affirmation of his view?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, certainly, but I must say I am surprised at the noble Lord for having taken out of their context words which were used in answer to a Question by him very different in character. The noble Lord will remember that he was asking me about the release of £3 million of the sterling balances to the Suez Canal Company, and the alarm to which he was there referring quite clearly had that connotation. I really must say that the noble Lord's use of those words in this context is wholly inappropriate and quite unjustified.

LORD KILLEARN

My Lords, I must rebut that at once. Under the rules I must not make a speech, but what had happened was that £3 million had been released from the general security which, by Government assurance in this and another place, was the final security for payment of these claims against Egypt. Contrary to the assurances given, as I maintain, £3 million-odd had been released from that security, thereby reducing the security pro tanto. It is one and the same question.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, all I can say to the noble Lord is that when the matter comes to be debated it will be found, I believe, that the release has cost nobody anything. When the noble Lord put his Question to me it was plain, at any rate to me, that he intended it to refer in general to the Anglo-Egyptian financial agreement and not to the specific question of release, to which my words applied in the first place. My only complaint was that he should apply words intended in one context to another. I go on to say that I see no reason for alarm either in relation to this matter. But I say it is a great mistake to misuse Question Time for the purpose of making tendentious observations.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

Well, well!

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, could the noble and learned Viscount answer one question? Does the signing of the Anglo-Egyptian pact on behalf of British nationals preclude any British national from attempting to get redress either from the Egyptian courts or any international court?

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

Certainly!

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

Would the noble Lord kindly repeat his question.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, I ask: does the signature of this pact by Her Majesty's Government on behalf of British nationals effectively prevent any British national who feels so inclined from endeavouring to get redress either in the Egyptian courts or in any international court?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, this is obviously a question of law, and my noble friend will forgive me if I say quite frankly that if he wanted a definitive reply he would have to put down a Question. But if I may speak "off the cuff", and with that qualification, I do not think that these claims previously were justiciable in any municipal court or any international court. They were in the field of diplomacy, and therefore the signature of the agreement would not, I believe, affect the justiciability of the claims; because I would not myself think that ordinarily they were justiciable.

LORD WILMOT OF SELMESTON

My Lords, is it not now apparent that in view of these results of Government diplomacy in this matter British nationals would probably have done better had they opened their own negotiations in an attempt to mitigate the disastrous policy of Her Majesty's Government?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I should have thought they would have got nothing whatever had they tried to do that.

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS

Hear, hear!

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I hope it is not too tendentious to ask whether Her Majesty's Government have received any general approval from the associations and individuals concerned in the British claims? Have they accepted the settlement with grace and thanks to Her Majesty's Government?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I should say that the approval which the Government seeks, and, I hope, will obtain, will be from Parliament. That is the appropriate constitutional body from which to seek it.

LORD REA

My Lords, may I ask the noble and learned Viscount whether he can indicate what remedy there is now for these people?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, it would be difficult for me, in the compass of a short answer, to give more than a tentative reply, and I hope that the noble Lord will put that question in debate when we discuss the subject; but I think he will find that the Foreign. Claims Corn-mission is, at any rate in the first place, the primary source for claiming against the Cash Fund and that the Mission with diplomatic immunity to be established in Cairo probably will be the source for help through the Foreign Office in the case of sequestrated properly. Perhaps I should say—and again I apologise for dealing with the question in a tentative way—that I think that my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has sent an individual letter to everybody known to be a claimant, giving him full instructions as to the way he should proceed.

LORD GIFFORD

My Lords, if, after the settlement of these claims is made, certain hard cases should emerge, would Her Majesty's Government give sympathetic consideration to them?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I think that that is a question which could be appropriately raised in debate.