§ 2.42 p.m.
VISCOUNT ELIBANKMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, seeing that they were a party to the 1953 Mehlem Deconcentration Agreement under which Herr Alfried Krupp von Bohlen and Halbach undertook never again to engage in the iron and steel industries except in a very minor specified way in his Widia works, and to sell an estimated 74 per cent. of his steel, iron and coal producing assets within five years, they can say when approximately they will be in a position to give a statement showing in detail the terms of the 558 1959 application made by Herr Krupp to the Mixed Committee for an extension of time in which to sell the aforesaid assets, and the Committee's reasons in detail for granting an extension up to January 31, 1961.]
§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE)My Lords, I notice that the noble Viscount has phrased his Question today in a different way, and take it that his object is to ascertain whether or not the Mixed Committee can, in effect, overrule the policy of Her Majesty's Government in relation to the deconcentration agreement of 1953. As I have on more than one occasion informed your Lordships, the Mixed Committee which was set up by the procedure agreed by the four signatory Governments has no other function than to allow or to disallow an extension of time within which the assets of Herr Krupp may be disposed of. As regards a statement on the terms of Herr Krupp's application and the reasons for granting the extension, I hope that a report from the Mixed Committee will shortly be made available to the four Governments. As your Lordships know, the decision to make such a report public does not rest with Her Majesty's Government alone.
VISCOUNT ELIBANKMy Lords, I beg to thank the noble Marquess for his Answer. Is he aware that I framed my Question in somewhat different form in the hopes that at least he might give me a favourable Answer to it? With regard to the second part of his Answer, may I ask him this question? Is the position that when the Committee reports to the Governments, although the British Government may be anxious to give to Parliament the report of the Committee, it will still he subject to the assent and consent of the other Governments, including Dr. Adenauer and the United States Government? If that is so, will the Government press very vigorously that their view, that the report should be submitted to Parliament, should be adopted?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, what the noble Viscount said as regards the position if and when a report is submitted is perfectly correct. I can assure your Lordships that my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary is fully aware of the interest 559 that has been taken by your Lordships in this matter and of the views that have been expressed in your Lordships' House; and of course he will bear these facts in mind in considering the report if and when it is received.
§ LORD HENDERSONMy Lords, may we have an assurance from the noble Marquess that when the report is available Her Majesty's Government will press the other three Governments that the report be made public? This is the second period of grace that has been granted. It will be possible for the Committee to go on granting further extensions. The Committee is not a supranational authority. Is it not right that Parliament should be told the reasons why the full implementation of Law 27 is being put in suspense?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I tried to explain, in my reply to Lord Elibank's question, that of course my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary will take these views into consideration; but as I have said all along, it would be improper for me to make a unilateral declaration on this matter. It is something which concerns four Governments. As we have been reminded (I think it was by the noble Lord, Lord Conesford), we cannot in any way alter the situation. We have put our hands to an international agreement and we must abide by the terms of that international agreement.
§ LORD HENDERSONMy Lords, the only unilateral action I am asking for is that Her Majesty's Government will go to her colleagues and recommend the publication of this report. I can see no reason why Her Majesty's Government should not make such a concession publicly now.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I do not want to appear difficult and obstinate over this matter, but we have not yet received the report: the report is not yet in existence, and in those circumstances I am really not prepared to give such an assurance.
VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, is it possible for Her Majesty's Government to make sonic agreement that makes it impossible for them to yield to the sovereign power of Parliament?
VISCOUNT ELIBANKMy Lords, the noble Marquess has dealt with great courtesy with all my questions on this subject. Might I ask this further question? In order to obviate further questions from time to time, would he be prepared to make a statement on the subject when this report comes into their hands?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I do not want to give a snap answer to that question. I think, on the face of it, the suggestion is a reasonable one, but I should like time to consider it and to discuss it with my right honourable friend.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, is the noble Marquess not aware that there is a growing feeling in the country that the Government are not being quite firm enough in these matters? That has been brought out again with the controversy about Spanish-German arrangements. I hope that in this matter, at any rate, our Parliament can be assured that the Government will be firm in seeing the agreement is properly carried out.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEWith great respect to the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition, this is at the moment not a question of Her Majesty's Government; this is a question of the Mixed Committee.
§ LORD BIRDWOODMy Lords, would the noble Marquess think it is appropriate, in consideration of this question, to note that in fact Herr Krupp made very determined efforts for a period of five years, from 1952 to 1957, to sell the greater part of his interests—that is the Rheinhausen works—to an American concern, but that the attitude of the State Department was not helpful and in fact negotiations broke down due to that attitude?
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHHe could give it away, could he not?