HL Deb 04 December 1973 vol 347 cc438-41
LORD SEGAL

My 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 would be prepared to consider breaking off diplomatic relations with Israel in order to ensure their supplies of oil.

EARL. FERRERS

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have made it abundantly clear that they are not to be moved from policies they believe to be right by threats to our oil supplies.

LORD JANNER

My Lords, if that is the case, would Her Majesty's Government say what steps they propose to take in order to help the Netherlands, which is firmly resisting the blackmail that is going on, to maintain her position in so far as oil is concerned?

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, my right honourable friend and his Department are always ready to have proper consultations and discussions with those concerned. This is what is happening.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, may I take it that the reply of the noble Earl is a definite negative: that Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to consider breaking off diplomatic relations with Israel to ensure their supplies of oil?

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, the reply was in the negative.

LORD WIGG

My Lords, would not the noble Earl agree that what is wanted in order to safeguard oil supplies is a peace in the Middle East based upon the principles of justice, balance of forces and an agreement which is acceptable throughout the world? Would he not agree that we shall not get that by using emotive words like "blackmail" when we are talking about the same kind of action which is highly respectable when we call it "sanctions"?

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, I go along wholeheartedly with the noble Lord, Lord Wigg, and particularly with the first part of what he said. This is an entirely difficult and delicate situation; as everyone knows, it is one in which we are vitally concerned to see that justice is done. The only real answer to the noble Lord's question is that there should be a full and proper peace settlement in the Middle East, and that is the aim of my right honourable friend.

LORD JANNER

My Lords, does not the noble Earl think that this is blackmailing the world, and is it not time that the civilised nations of the world got together and tried to stop this kind of action, because if he is faced properly a blackmailer never succeeds?

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have not been subjected to blackmail, and do not propose to be subjected to it.

THE EARL OF ARRAN

My Lords, are Her Majesty's Government now totally dedicated to a policy of appeasement, and have they lost all sense of national honour?

EARL FERRERS

No, my Lords, to both questions.

LORD WIGG

My Lords, would the noble Earl be good enough to try to persuade the noble Lord, Lord Janner, and his Zionist friends, that the interests of this country must be paramount in the consideration of this matter, and that it is no good talking loosely about "blackmail" because there is no blackmail involved here? Peace in the Middle East can be furthered to-morrow if the Israeli forces were to move back behind the Mitla Pass.

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, I can understand the point of view taken by the noble Lord, Lord Janner, and one realises that this is a point of view held by many people; but the real point is to try to get a peace settlement. In answer to Lord Wigg, I would go along with him and say that I would hope that the noble Lord, Lord Janner, and others would not, despite their great concern, be too keen on pressing Her Majesty's Government on this matter because our one object is to enable delicate negotiations to come to a fruitful conclusion.

LORD POPPLEWELL

My Lords, in view of the very difficult situation that exists there, with the Arabs saying that the Israelis must move back to given lines, would the noble Earl publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT of this House what were the original boundaries defined by the United Nations when they set up the State of Israel? What part of the West Bank, what part of the Golan Heights, were allocated to the Arabs, and what parts allocated to Israel? This would help us to get a real balance as to where trespass is occurring.

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, at a time when great concern is being exerted to effect not just a cease-fire but a peace treaty. I do not think that the publication of that kind of document in the OFFICIAL REPORT would be helpful.

LORD JANNER

My Lords, in view of the statement made a moment or two ago by my noble friend Lord Wigg, may I ask whether the noble Earl is aware that so far as Israel is concerned she wants peace, and that it is in the interests of the civilised world, including ourselves, that that peace should be obtained on a proper and real understanding? Is he also aware that any threats by anyone else to try to disturb the possibility of a settlement between the two peoples themselves, such as the blackmail threat—and I call it a blackmail threat—over oil, is something which interferes with the possibility of such a peace? Holland recognises that to be so.

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, of course the Israelis wish to have peace; so do we, and so do the Arabs. However, there are differing points of view, and our efforts should be concentrated on trying to reconcile these different points of view.

LORD KILMANY

My Lords, is not the answering of this Question turning itself into a debate? Do we really want that in the conduct of the Business of this House?

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD WINDLESHAM)

My Lords. I think that there is a great deal in what the noble Lord says. Starred Questions are not supposed to lead to a debate. I have not intervened on this Question up to now because I know, and acknowledge, as does the House, the strength of feeling of the noble Lord, Lord Janner, and others on this matter. We have discussed it on a number of occasions and I am sure that we shall discuss it again in the future. But if your Lordships feel it appropriate to move on to the next Question now I think that we should do so.