§ LORD BROCKWAYMy 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 been approached to appoint a representative on the international commission to supervise a cease-fire in Vietnam and what has been their reply.
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have not been approached to appoint a representative on an international commission to supervise a ceasefire in Vietnam.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that Answer, may I ask whether she is aware that I am a little surprised? Has the noble Baroness seen the statement of Mr. Rogers, the United States Secretary of State, that the United States are already in touch with possible members of this commission?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEYes, my Lords. I understand that the Americans have announced that Canada, Indonesia, Hungary and Poland have been approached as members of the new international commission for supervision and control.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, is not this quite extraordinary? Is it not the case that in the preliminary agreement between the United States and North Vietnam Britain was included as a member of this commission? What is the 228 explanation for this present apparent boycott?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, there is a difference between the Conference and the commission. Her Majesty's Government's responsibilities are those under the 1954 Geneva Agreement on Indo-China and as a member and co-chairman of the 1954 Geneva Conference. The international commission on supervision and control, which was also appointed under those 1954 Agreements. consisted of representatives of India, Canada and Poland, and of course was responsible for the supervision of the cease-fire and settlement. I need hardly say that Her Majesty's Government will be very glad to help in any way in which they are invited to do so.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, we share with the noble Baroness her hopes for the future, and her pleasure that so much advance has been made. We also accept from the noble Baroness that there is a difference between a commission and a conference. But are we to understand that the United States Government did not feel it necessary to consult the two co-chairmen of the Conference which is still in being?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, we are in close contact all the time. But, as I say, our obligations arose under the 1954 Agreements on the Conference.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I appreciate that the United States Government and Her Majesty's Government are in close contact. Can the noble Baroness say whether the United States Government consulted Her Majesty's Government as a co-chairman of the Geneva Conference about the appointment of this new commission?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, not in the exact sense in which the noble Lord raises the matter. We are in touch of course, and are aware of what is going on and as the noble Lord will be aware, we have often tried to reconvene the Geneva Conference.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, if I may ask another question, is it not the fact that in the preliminary agreement between Washington and Hanoi Britain and 229 France were proposed as members of this commission? If it is just a continuation of the international Commission, why is not India included?
BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR BELHELVIEMy Lords, the noble Lord quite rightly referred again to a "commission", which was the subject of his Question. I tried to draw a distinction between the commission and the Conference.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness why we are so anxious to be on this commission when it looks as if President Nixon is going to bomb his way to peace right to the end?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that intervention, but I am not quite sure how to reply to it.