§ TILE EARL OF DUNDEEMy 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 they have any information concerning the seizure over the Mediterranean on July 22 of a Boeing 707 airliner belonging to an Israeli airline, which was landed in Algiers; and in particular whether the crew and all the passengers have been released.]
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, as has been reported in the Press, the aircraft was diverted to Algeria during a flight from Rome to Lydda on the night of July 22. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine has claimed responsibility for the incident. All non-Israeli passengers have now left Algeria, as have the women and children of Israeli nationality. The male passengers of Israeli nationality and the crew—a total of 14 people—are still in Algeria. So is the aircraft itself.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, can the noble Lord say whether there is any kind of international action which 400 could be taken to deter acts of piracy in the air which are either instigated or condoned by responsible Governments? Is there not a United Nations special agency, called the International Civil Aviation Organisation, and might it not be asked to recommend some deterrent action, such as denial of the use of airports in other countries to the aircraft of Governments which deliberately encourage the hijacking of aircraft?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I shall, of course, take note of what the noble Earl has suggested. As we have seen in a previous incident of this kind, it is extremely difficult to get any kind of international action of the kind that he mentions. Indeed, even if such action were possible it is not by any means certain that it would act as a deterrent. This kind of sudden act of hijacking, as it has been called, in the air is not something that one can foresee, and it is very difficult indeed to imagine what sort of action might act as a deterrent, unless it could be proved that Governments themselves were involved in it; and of course we have no such proof.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, I was not thinking for the moment how to deter the actual criminals who with grenades or revolvers hold up aeroplanes in the air, but of the action of Governments afterwards, who condone the action by detaining the aircraft and the crew. There was the case of our own aircraft a year or two ago with Mr. Tshombe. Could not action be taken against the Governments, which might have a deterrent effect if the use of airfields in other countries were denied to them?
§ LORD HANKEYMy Lords, may I support the point made by the noble Earl? Will the Government kindly take into account the fact of the long history of piracy in that part of the Mediterranean, which finally drew the French in despair into that territory? Now that they have got out, would it not be a very great danger if the piracy started again, particularly to aircraft proceeding on ordinary business through the area? Would the Government consider it desirable to arrange some sort of international action, which could bring pressure to bear on the Algerian authorities to discourage piracy, and to release the aircraft in good time?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, as I said in my first Answer to the noble Earl, I will certainly bear these suggestions in mind. However, I think I should point out that this is not exclusively a matter for Her Majesty's Government. This was not a British aircraft and there were no British subjects on board. If this is to be a matter for international action, I am not entirely convinced that it should be a matter for initiative by Her Majesty's Government.
§ TFIE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the Government of Algeria are still permitted to send their aircraft freely into this country? If that is so, is there not a way in which we could bring pressure to bear directly?
§ LORD HANKEYMy Lords, will the Government kindly consider that British pilots have already been involved in an incident like this, and that it took us months to get them released?
§ LORD CHALFONTYes, my Lords. I take note of all these points, but I reiterate that in this particular case there is no immediate British interest at stake. This is an international problem and I really fail to see at the moment, and fail to be convinced, that this is a matter on which Her Majesty's Government should take an international initiative of this sort. This is a matter—if for anybody—for the United Nations. But I should like to say again that in this case, as in the previous one, it is very difficult to see how international action could he effective.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, while appreciating the noble Lord's attempt to meet the point, is he really satisfying this House by saying that it is not for Her Majesty's Government to take action that it is for the United Nations? The United Nations consists of a number of Member States. Unless an individual State takes action, how is any action ever taken? Is not Great Britain still with sufficient influence in the world to take some lead in a matter of this kind? Surely the noble Lord can do better than that.
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, whether or not I have satisfied the House is a question which I think the House can decide, and I am beginning to get 402 the sense of the House on that particular point. Of course, this is a very real point which the noble Lord has made. We are members of the United Nations; we are entitled to initiate action in the United Nations. I will bear in mind what has been said in your Lordships' House and bring it to the attention of my right honourable friend.