§ 2.45 p.m.
§ Baroness ELLIOT of HARWOODMy 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 what attitude they took to the United Nations' resolution of 24th November asking that Palestinian refugees should be returned to the camps in the Gaza Strip, in view of the fact that similar camps were destroyed and their numerous refugees rehoused by World Refugee Year appeal funds and, in Gaza, by the Israeli Government.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the British Government, together with the rest of the Nine, voted in favour of this resolution. When the resolution was earlier adopted by the Special Political Committee on 8th November, the Netherlands representative said that in the view of the Nine the call for the return of refugees applied only to those refugees who were forced to leave and who themselves wished to return.
§ Baroness ELLIOT of HARWOODMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord the Minister very much for his reply, which is more hopeful that I had anticipated. I was deeply concerned because the United Nations had a World Refugee Year appeal, 517 for which we in this country raised millions of pounds, as did other countries. It seems inconsistent that they should now ask that the refugees should go back to the camps which have been completely destroyed and rebuilt. Therefore, am I to understand that the reply given by the noble Lord the Minister today is to the effect that this was not the case, and that they have not been asked to go back?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am glad that the noble Baroness, Lady Elliot of Harwood, has found my Answer clarificatory of the position. I only repeat that the position is exactly as I said. The Netherlands representative, speaking for the Nine, made it clear in the Political Committee on 8th November, before this matter came up substantively on the 24th, to which the noble Baroness refers in her Question, that,
…in the view of the Nine, the call for the return of refugees applied only to those refugees who were forced to leave and who themselves wished to return".
Lord JANNERMy Lords, would my noble friend agree that the houses which have replaced the hovels on the Gaza Strip are now actually being purchased by many of the refugees who had been housed there in consequence of the fact that they have been properly treated by the Israeli Government? Would my noble friend also agree that tremendous emphasis is being put on the position so far as Israel is concerned, whereas millions of refugees throughout the world have been treated very much worse by other countries?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, of course comparisons are usually odious, and particularly so in this field of the attrition of refugees. I would not compete with my noble friend in comparing the horrors of refugee life in any part of the world. I am more inclined to welcome the spirit and content of the Question and supplementary question of the noble Baroness, Lady Elliot of Harwood.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, is it not a fact that the maintenance of these refugee camps by the United Nations prevented the absorption of refugees such as occurred after the Great War, and such as has occurred for all the Jewish refugees from Arab 518 countries? Is it not a fact that to try to reinstate the nuisance is an international folly?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am faintly surprised by the murmurs of acquiescence from behind me to that particular supplementary. I hope that my noble friend Lord Janner will look at it carefully tomorrow morning in Hansard, in the full light of day. In reply to my noble friend Lord Paget of Northampton, I very much doubt whether the preamble to his question would be justified, but I take his point. Nobody can boast of a perfect record in dealing with this massive and poignant problem, especially in the Middle East. There may be hopes now, when we are, I hope, moving to a reconstitution of the Geneva Conference, or the establishment of a similar mechanism for agreement, that this, among other aspects of the Middle East question, may at last be considered constructively by the parties concerned.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that the Jewish record in absorbing refugees in the Middle East has been about as near perfect as could be imagined?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, this is a matter of argument and opinion. I do not think it would be helpful for any Government Minister to say, Yes, or, No, to that kind of question. What we know is that nobody has a perfect record in dealing with these unfortunate people in the Middle East or in any other part of the world. All of us must do better.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, in view of the reply my noble friend has given, when the refugee question is dealt with, will he bring forward the fact that there are 600,000 Jews who have been dispossessed in Arab lands, have been paid no compensation, whose homes have been taken over by those who have interfered with their lands and made it impossible for them to live there, so that at least the matter will be put in proper perspective?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, of course, this is one aspect of this grim question; that is, the position of refugees, their origins, their numbers, the 519 conditions in which they have lived and do live. As I have said, our great hope is that, certainly once the new American Administration have found their feet, it may be possible to convene a constructive conference of all concerned, possibly in Geneva, in order to settle this and other questions relative to the whole complex of difficulty in the Middle East.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, would my noble friend not agree that slum clearance is a sound policy which should be applied as widely as possible, and that where water, sanitation and other health safeguards can be provided, political considerations ought not to be allowed to stand in the way?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I agree wholeheartedly.