§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what seem to be the obstacles to an exchange of Ambassadors with China.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN)My Lords, we are in favour of an unconditional exchange of Ambassadors with China. This was made known to the Chinese as long ago as 1950. At various times the Chinese have raised different preconditions. Consistent features have been Chinese objection to our maintenance of a Consulate on. Taiwan and to our vote on the procedural resolution on Chinese representation in the United Nations.
§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEKMy Lords, in view of the fact that there is a lessening of tension; that travel facilities exist between the United States and China; that on March 4 there was a reception in the Chinese Embassy and Mr. John Denson, our representative and Chargeé d' Affaires, received Chou En-lai, may I ask whether we could still explore the possibility of getting some agreement, so that we may open up the trading opportunities which certainly exist?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Leek. We very much welcome the improvement in the atmosphere between the People's Republic of China and the world in general, including ourselves. This matter is naturally under consideration and the points he has raised are, of course, relevant to it.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess this question? He mentioned that one of the objections of China was to our vote against the procedural resolution. Have Her Majesty's Government made up their 500 minds as to how they will vote on this matter when it is raised again in the United Nations?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANNo, my Lords, this matter is under consideration, as I told the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, on a previous occasion. Of course, we do not know yet whether this resolution will be put this year in the United Nations, but, as I say, the matter is receiving close attention.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, can the noble Marquess inform the House whether Her Majesty's Government are quite free to make a decision on this matter in advance of such a decision being taken by the United States of America?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANYes, my Lords, I think Her Majesty's Government are quite as free to take a decision on this matter as on any other matter.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, if Her Majesty's Government were now to reverse the farcical and hypocritical attitude on this procedural question and so inform the Chinese Government, would there not be a good chance that they, on their part, would realise that the maintenance of our Consulate on Taiwan no more confers recognition in international law than the maintenance of our Consulate in Los Angeles confers recognition on the sovereign State of California?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I very much hope that the Chinese People's Republic will understand that this is the position regarding our Consulate on Taiwan. It confers no sort of recognition whatsoever on the Nationalist authorities.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, is it not the fact that the question of Chinese representation in the United Nations is important; and if it is important, are not the express terms of Article 18 of the Charter conclusive?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, this is an important question and Her Majesty's Government are considering how important it would be, if the matter should go that far.
§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEKMy Lords, may I ask Her Majesty's Government 501 whether they will now recognise the reality of the existence of the mainland Chinese People's Republic as compared to the shadow of Taiwan?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, as I said before, Her Majesty's Government very much welcome the new atmosphere in relation to the Chinese People's Republic. I am quite certain that my right honourable friend will take note of what the noble Lord has said.
§ LORD GORE-BOOTHMy Lords, in order that there may be no misunderstanding, may I ask the following two questions? If the resolution is presented again and it involves our voting that this is not an important question, and if we wish to proceed, is not the heart of the matter the bringing about of a different procedure in the United Nations? Secondly, is it not perhaps misleading to imply that we do not have trade opportunities in China? Because they have existed ever since we recognised the Chinese People's Republic.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, in reply to the second of the noble Lord's questions, of course that is the case. In reply to the first of his questions, perhaps we are getting a little wide of the original Question in considering United Nations procedure; but, as I said, the question of the vote on the procedural resolution is under very active consideration.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, can the noble Marquess assure the House that Her Majesty's Government have no intention, either now or in the future, of closing down Her Britannic Majesty's Consulate in Taiwan?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, the question of this Consulate is under consideration, in common with other consulates of Her Majesty's Government in other parts of the world. I am afraid that I cannot say more than that at the present time.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, are the Government aware that Article 18 of the Charter expressly requires a two-thirds majority of those present and voting upon any important question? If the question of Chinese representation in the United Nations is important, is the noble Marquess really prepared to say that it is 502 so important that it should be treated as not important?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANNo, my Lords; I was not saying that at all. What I was saying in reply to the original question was that whether this matter is being put or not at the next session of the Assembly, we do not know at this moment and we are considering what our action should be, if it is put.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I expect he will not be, but is the noble Marquess willing to say whether the credentials question in regard to the Chinese is intrinsically more important than the credentials question in regard to any smaller and less significant member of the United Nations?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I really do not think that I can go into that matter just at this time.