§ 2.55 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, I beg to 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 they will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the resolution on Aden adopted on May 17 by the United Nations Special Committee on Colonialism; whether it is a fact that this resolution demands the removal of our military base at Aden, a general election supervised by the United Nations, and the grant of immediate independence; and whether Her Majesty's Government have represented to the Secretary-General that this resolution is an attempt to interfere with the internal affairs of member states, which is contrary to the United Nations Charter.]
§ LORD WALSTONMy Lords, in answer to the first part of the noble 5 Earl's question, the resolution to which the noble Earl refers is available in the Library of the House. The answer to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative. The United Kingdom voted against this resolution, and in his explanation of his vote the United Kingdom representative said that the reference to the base went beyond the Committee's terms of reference. He also pointed out that reference to the holding of general elections and the granting of immediate independence seemed to prejudge the work of the Constitutional Commission, which the resolution had failed to mention.
The answer to the third part of the Question is in the negative. Her Majesty's Government's position on the resolution was made clear by the fact that we voted against it. We have of course always made it clear that the responsibility for British dependent territories is ours alone and that we cannot accept intervention from outside. It remains the policy of the Government to co-operate so far as possible with the United Nations. We therefore continue to serve as a member of the Special Committee on Colonialism, to give information to the Committee, to explain the problems of our colonial territories and to reply to criticism of our policies.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that we are spending hundreds of millions of pounds, to the great disadvantage of our balance of payments, at Aden and elsewhere, in defending the freedom and independence of most of this Committee of 24 who spend all their time in demanding that we should withdraw from Aden? Is the noble Lord aware that our action in continuing to serve on this Committee is interpreted very widely in the United Nations, not as an act of good nature and good will on our part but as a confession of colonialist guilt, and is it not about time that we ceased to serve any further as a member of this Committee of extremely mischievous meddlers who are acting contrary to Article 2 of the United Nations Charter?
§ LORD WALSTONMy Lords, I am not aware that the reaction in the United Nations and in countries throughout the world is that described by the noble 6 Earl. I think that if anybody took the trouble, as I am sure the noble Earl has done, to read the statements made by our representative at the United Nations on these occasions, there could be no excuse whatsoever for him to feel the way the noble Earl has described, and I hope that if he comes across people who feel that way he will refer them to, or quote to them, extracts which make this absolutely clear. I would once more say that we are always glad to co-operate with this Committee. We believe that. although it does some things of which we do not approve, it also serves a useful purpose, and as one of the Committees of the United Nations, of which we are members, we believe that we should give it such support as we can.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, do Her Majesty's Government regard this resolution as contrary to the United Nations Charter, Article 2, subsection (7), and if so does the willingness to co-operate extend to co-operating with regard to the passage of such resolutions?
§ LORD WALSTONMy Lords, I have already made it clear in my answer just where our responsibility lies and just where we consider the responsibility of this Committee lies, and there can be no misunderstanding about that. And we have also made it clear, in voting against the resolution, how we feel about it. I would remind the noble and learned Viscount that, in any case, the resolution is not a mandatory one.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, would the noble Lord be good enough to answer the first part of the supplementary question: Do Her Majesty's Government regard this resolution as contrary to Article 2, subsection (7) of the United Nations Charter?
§ LORD WALSTONI will gladly answer that if the noble and learned Viscount will put down a Question on its own, rather than putting it as a supplementary.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEThe noble Lord will see it is asserted in the original Question, at the end, that it was contrary to the United Nations Charter, so the question does arise directly out of the Question asked. I should be grateful for the information. If the noble Lord cannot give it now I will certainly take the course he has suggested and table a Question.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREMy Lords, would Her Majesty's Government not agree that, while we remain members of this Committee, although we voted against the resolution we are condoning the activities of this Committee? To oppose consistently what the Committee votes for and yet remain members of it seems to me both contemptible and dishonourable.
§ LORD WALSTONMy Lords, I think I have already answered that, but I will repeat the answer and say that, by remaining members of the Committee and by speaking, as we have done, and showing our views, we are not condoning anything of which we disapprove but are making our position abundantly clear.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, would it be too great a revolution in practice to insist that knowledge of the Charter was a condition of membership of the Committee?