asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what further progress has been made in the attempt to arrange the return of Brian Cowell to this country from West Germany.

The German authorities have informed Her Majesty's Consul-General at Stuttgart that they have decided to take steps to suspend the sentence of imprisonment passed on Mr. Cowell and to deport him. In the light of Mr. Cowell's United Kingdom citizenship and of the diagnosis of his mental condition, Her Majesty's Government are ready to accept him. Appropriate arrangements will be made for his treatment in this country.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that comprehensive and fairly hopeful reply. I realise the difficulties involved, but in view of the serious mental illness of this person, which is causing very great distress to his parents, will the hon. Gentleman do everything possible to expedite his return to this country and his entry to Broadmoor and to give a definite date as soon as possible?

I cannot today promise that he will return to this country before Christmas, but the hon. Gentleman can rest assured that the steps he wishes will be carried out as quickly as possible.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if the Foreign Secretary will make another visit to Bonn in the near future.

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has no plans at present to visit Bonn again in the near future.

I know that the Foreign Secretary will be engaged at Leyton in the near future. However, can the Government ensure that after the Prime Minister's forthcoming visit to Bonn, the impressions left with the German Government on that occasion will not appear to be controverted soon afterwards by a speech in the House?

I do not believe that that happened. In his talks with the German Foreign Minister in London on 11th December, the Foreign Secretary has had a further exchange of views on several subjects immediately after his return from Washington with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the torture of prisoners in Vietnam, he will seek the co-operation of the other co-chairman of the Geneva Conference in order to make joint representations to the Control Commission to investigate the circumstances.

No, Sir. If the International Commission considers these deplorable incidents to fall within its terms of reference, it has the power to investigate them without any prompting on our part.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the pictures of torture which appeared recently in the newspapers could at least be accompanied by some expression of distaste, since the struggle against Communism is primarily moral rather than military?

Incidents of the kind to which my hon. Friend refers are to be deplored, whoever commits them. Unfortunately, in conditions of civil war in Vietnam, this kind of thing is happening on both sides. The main thing is to give the legitimate Government of South Vietnam the necessary assistance to bring the bloodshed to an end.

Would my hon. Friend consider the fact that this civil war has now been going on for several years and that it is highly desirable that we should be informed about further developments in the war and the further activities of both sides, whether in the form of torture or of bombing or of any other actions of this kind? Should not my hon. Friend therefore call for a report from the Special Commission to supplement the report it presented as long ago as 1962?

Reports have been called for from the Commission over recent years, particularly in response to previous reports exposing North Vietnamese violations of the agreement, but the results do not encourage me to believe that any further report would have much practical result.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is increasing prevalence of torture under all sorts of regimes in all parts of the world and that this is a most devastating commentary on the present stage which civilisation has reached? Has not the time arrived when some great nation, particularly this great nation, should call attention to the universal horror and disgust and grief caused to all civilised men by these disgusting and out-of-date practices?

Yes, Sir. I did say that everyone deplores these acts of cruelty arising from civil war, whichever side commits them. There is the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Her Majesty's Government give the strongest possible support. Unfortunately, it is not legally binding on its member States.

But I am asking for more. I am asking for a definite statement.

Order. The Question is only about Vietnam.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if, in the light of his responsibilities as co-chairman of the Geneva Conference, he will make a statement about the Government's policy towards South Vietnam.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, if, in the light of his responsibilities as co-chairman of the 1954 Geneva Conference, he will make a statement about the Government's policy towards Vietnam.

The policy of Her Majesty's Government remains to support the Government of the Republic of Vietnam in their efforts to put an end to the Communist insurrection which, aided and directed from Hanoi in constant violation of the Geneva Agreements, threatens the independence of the South Vietnamese people.

As the dangers of a much wider conflict are always present in what is happening in South Vietnam, would not the hon. Gentleman agree that it would be better that as soon as possible we invite to the conference table all the Powers concerned with interests in South-East Asia? Is not this the best way to bring home to public opinion our interest in the vital importance of the independence of South Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia?

To have successful peace negotiations, a reasonable basis for those negotiations is required. It is very difficult for the Government of South Vietnam to negotiate under the duress of the kind of insurrection which they face at the moment.

Will my hon. Friend recall the advice given by U Thant several months ago that a political settlement of the Indo-Chinese and Vietnamese problems should be sought rather than a military settlement and that it should be sought by the recall of the 1954 Geneva Conference on the basis of that conference, which was the unity, independence and non-alignment of Vietnam? When will the new British Government take an initiative in this direction since, as co-chairman, they have the power to join with the Soviet co-chairman in doing this right away?

I appreciate what my hon. Friend is saying. We find, however, no reason to suppose that at the present stage another conference would persuade the Communists in South Vietnam and the forces who are supporting them from outside South Vietnam to honour their existing obligations under the 1954 Geneva Agreements, of which there have been many breaches.

Will the Minister state whether any assurances have been given by his Government to the United States of America of further military assistance to support America if that became necessary and the situation deteriorated?

No assurances were asked for or given. As the communiqué issued after the Washington talks made clear, Her Majesty's Government recognise the particular importance of the military effort which the United States Government are making in support of the Vietnamese Government.

Does not my hon. Friend recognise that the American policy in Southern Vietnam is in violation of the 1954 Treaties, to which we are a party, that the Government which they are supporting is a puppet Government which they themselves have imposed, that public opinion will be shocked at the revelation that we are following the policy of the Tories in this matter and that, apart from being a crime, this policy is a blunder because it will make our name stink throughout the Far East, and that the policy is bound to fail anyway?

No, Sir, I accept none of those things. Her Majesty's Government are merely seeking to bring about a position in South Vietnam whereby that country has the right to determine its own future in independence. We seek as a long-term aim the neutralisation of that area, but for neutralisation one needs a basis for successful negotiation.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what has been the annual expenditure for each of the last three years on the British contribution to counter-guerilla and counter-subversive activities in South Vietnam; and what is the total number of British civilian and military personnel, respectively, who have been involved.

The cost of maintaining the British Advisory Mission in Saigon and providing certain training facilities in Malaysia was approximately £83,000 in the financial year 1962–63 and £78,000 in 1963–64. The estimated cost in 1964–65 will be £98,000. Except for the Service Attachés at the British Embassy, there are no British military personnel in South Vietnam. The total staff of the British Advisory Mission has never exceeded ten, all of them civilians.

What exactly is the function of these advisers? As they are headed by Brigadier Thompson, who had experience in counter-guerrilla activities in Malaysia, can my hon. Friend say whether they are advising on counter-guerrilla activities in South Vietnam and have been doing so and whether their job has been mainly to assist in propping up probably the most loathsome régimes that have yet been produced in South-East Asia?

The British mission is staffed entirely by civilians and its advice is given only to civilian organs of the Vietnamese Government.

A few moments ago, the hon. Gentleman joined me in expressing horror at the atrocities and torture which were alleged to have taken place on both sides. Will he use the services of this mission to secure a report on these alleged happenings with a view to taking action?

I have informed the House that this mission is a civilian one in contact with civilian organs in Vietnam. It would not be a suitable body to undertake the task which the hon. Member suggests.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in the early stages, the American missions were called civilian missions, too, until their civilian clothes disappeared and they became military missions? Will he firmly assure the House that this British civilian mission is, in fact, a civilian mission?

Yes, Sir, this is a civilian mission, in contact with civilian organs of the Vietnamese Government, although, unfortunately, in the present conditions of rebellion in Vietnam, the borderline between police operations and military guerrilla operations is somewhat narrow.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government have now been able to obtain the agreement of the Governments of Israel and Jordan to the repair and future upkeep by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission of their cemetery on Mount Scopus.

No, Sir. Each of the two Governments have remained unwilling to adopt any scheme which was acceptable to the other. In consultation with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation, we are continuing our attempts to arrive at a solution.

Is not this cemetery the only one in the care of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission which is still in a very bad state of repair? Cannot something definite be done with these two Governments? Are the other members of the Commonwealth giving their help? Has not the United Nations Truce Supervisory Commission offered to maintain four gardeners and transport them and the necessary equipment and materials to the cemetery? What has been the response?

Up to now it has been impossible to get any scheme acceptable to both Governments, but we shall continue to do all we can to find a solution.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals Her Majesty's Government have for disengagement in Europe; and if he will make a statement.

Her Majesty's Government are in favour of any measure which would help to reduce tension and increase security in Europe, provided that it would not weaken the Western Alliance or make more difficult the solution of the German problem. Any controlled reduction of forces in Europe would have to meet these criteria, and Her Majesty's Government at all times would have to act in close consultation and unity with her allies.

Does this mean that the Government have abandoned past Labour Party proposals of this kind? Will the Government none the less give their support to the sensible idea of an exchange of observers against surprise attack?

The answer to the latter part of that supplementary question is, "Yes, certainly". As to the first part, the hon. Member would do well to await the debate in this House on Wednesday and Thursday and in another place on Thursday, when he will see the unfolding of Her Majesty's Government's policy. The importance we attach to this issue is shown by the appointment of a Minister of State responsible for disarmament negotiations.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that disarmament without inspection would be quite intolerable?

Any satisfactory scheme for international disarmament will inevitably involve control and inspection.

Are the Government engaged in any conversations with our allies on these matters? While I approve the general lines of the hon. Member's statement, I should like to know the answer to that.

I simply confirm what I said in my reply. Her Majesty's Government will at all times act in close consultation and unity with her allies.

Is my hon. Friend giving further consideration to the Gomulka Plan for a freeze of nuclear weapons in Central Europe? Can we hope that there will be some indication of the Government attitude in this respect in the debate later this week?

As my hon. Friend knows, our N.A.T.O. allies see a number of objections to these proposals on political, military and technical grounds, but we shall he prepared carefully to examine any further proposals which the Polish Government might care to make with a view to improving East-West relations and bringing about further progress towards disarmament.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his last answer is similar in every word to an answer which I gave to the House a few months ago?

As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, there is at least a difference of emphasis between the approach of the present Government and that of the Government defeated at the General Election.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will initiate proposals at the United Nations so that urgent rescue operations may be carried out as required in future.

We are hoping to have wide-ranging discussions in the United Nations in the near future about peace-keeping. If these discussions are successful, it may prove possible to undertake rescue operations in conditions internationally acceptable. Her Majesty's Government will not hesitate to take an initiative on this whenever they feel it would be helpful. It would, however, be premature to make specific proposals at the present time.

Will the hon. Gentleman suggest that in the meantime the United Nations might strengthen its skeleton staff for military operations so that it can make forward plans, realising how difficult that is, in view of the imminence of possible disturbances in many parts of the world?

Yes, Sir. As I told the House in a recent debate, it is very much in the mind of Her Majesty's Government to see a strengthening of the headquarters staff of the United Nations.

In considering this, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, after the experience of the first attempt of the United Nations forces in the Congo, Mr. Dag Hammarskjöld expressed himself as extremely sceptical of a United Nations fire brigade?

No, Sir. I think the hon. Gentleman is misquoting what the late Mr. Hammarskjöld said. I think everybody understands the imperfections of the United Nations operation in the Congo, but at least there is general agreement that without that operation the cold war would have come much more actively into the Congo than it did.

Was not the great mistake in the Congo the premature withdrawal of the United Nations forces, without any action by our Government to try to prevent it?

It was a great pity that circumstances came about in which the United Nations withdrew before adequate arrangements had been made for the central Government of the Congo to be able to maintain unity and law and order throughout the whole of the territory.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will give an assurance that no British subject by birth of French parents, having served in Her Majesty's Services, will, under the Anglo-French Military Service Agreement of 1952, be liable for military service in France.

The greement of 1952 provided that Anglo-French dual nationals who fulfilled their military obligations in the one country would be considered to have fulfilled them also in the other country. However, Article Nine provided that nothing in the Agreement should prevent either of the parties in an emergency from calling up the persons referred to for further service or from placing them on the reserve list. Moreover, under the terms of the Agreement, only those who are considered to have fulfilled their military obligations while compulsory military service was in force in this country are still entitled to any benefit from the Agreement in France.

Would the hon. Gentleman confirm that the Agreement is in force? Has it yet been ratified? What is the position if a British subject by birth, having served, goes to France? Can he be detained there, and, in those circumstances, what would the Government do about it?

This is a rather complicated issue. The Agreement is not in force, in the sense that the French Government have never given the required notification that constitutional approval has been obtained. But since 1952 it has been regarded as provisionally in force and has been applied administratively in both countries. It would be much better for the hon. Gentleman to await the reply to the specific case which he has raised with me.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what advice he gives to British organisations with members stationed in disturbed areas of Africa and Asia to withdraw at least their wives and children in good time when civil disturbance appears probable.

Her Majesty's Government recognise their duty to warn British communities in foreign countries when their lives and property appear to be endangered. The nature of the warning depends on the circumstances. The responsibility for deciding what action to take on receipt of a warning rests on each individual and on the organisation to which he or she is attached.

Would it be possible to be rather more emphatic than that in some areas of Africa and Asia where minorities are obviously endangered and to try to suggest more emphatically that women and children might be got out a bit earlier?

I recognise the importance of this subject. The timing of such a warning is a delicate matter in which consideration for the safety of British lives and property has to be weighed against the risk of causing unnecessary alarm and hardship.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what steps were taken by Her Majesty's Government to keep the United Nations informed about the use of Ascension Island in the recent operation before it was undertaken.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what prior consultations the United Kingdom delegate at the United Nations had with the Secretary-General of the United Nations Organisation before Her Majesty's Government agreed to the use of Ascension Island by Belgian and American troops.

None, Sir. There was no obligation to inform or consult the United Nations beforehand. We acted in accordance with inter national law, which gives nations the right to go to the assistance of their nationals when there is a serious threat to their safety in foreign territory. Secrecy is necessary for the success of such an operation, and to have informed the United Nations beforehand would have endangered the lives of those being rescued. As soon as the expedition had taken place, however, we fully informed the Secretary-General of what we had done and of the reasons for the rescue operation.

Does my hon. Friend realise that what he has said in the latter part of his Answer will give great satisfaction to those many people, in the House and in the country, who wish to see the Government using the United Nations on all possible useful occasions?

I accept what my hon. Friend has said. However, will he be careful about any future involvement in the Congo, as Mr. Tshombe obviously has very little African support and speaks not so much for the people of the Congo as for those who control its resources?

There are later Question on the Order Paper about the Congo.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make further representations to the Government of the United Arab Republic about the property and possessions of British nationals which were re-sequestrated in October, 1961; and if he will reach a final decision on whether this property is to be returned or retained, and on the degree of compensation that will be offered.

We are in continuous touch with the United Arab Republic Government on this matter.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for the firmness of that reply. Can he give the House any idea how long these negotiations are likely to drag on? Is he aware that it is three years since these people were dispossessed of their property through no fault of their own, and that compensation, when payable, should be paid very quickly?

We recognise the urgency of the problem, and that is why we are now considering the possibility of intergovernmental negotiation.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make representations to the Danish and Faroese Governments, with a view to holding discussions with the British fishing industry on the related questions of the extension of Faroese limits and quota fish landings in Great Britain.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will convene a conference with the Danish Government to discuss a settlement to the Faroese fishing dispute.

I see no prospect that representations to the Danish authorities would bring about a settlement of the present dispute between the two fishing industries. The Danish and Faroese authorities have repeatedly made it clear that they are not prepared to concede any fishing rights within their 12-mile zone.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that within the last week a meeting has taken place between representatives of the Faroese and British fishing industries with very beneficial results? Is he further aware that as from today British fishing vessels are not to be allowed to carry out repairs in Faroese ports? How can this problem ever be solved unless there are direct Government-to-Government negotiations?

I am aware of the Press reports to which the hon. Gentleman refers. We have asked our Chargé d'Affaires in Copenhagen for a report. Until that is received, I cannot say what action, if any, Her Majesty's Government will take in the matter.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the failure of earlier conferences to resolve the differences between British fishing fleets, particularly Scottish fishing fleets, and those mentioned in the Question make it urgently necessary for the Government to make another attempt to try to summon a thoroughly representative international conference to deal with the relevant problems? Will the Government take steps in that direction?

In view of the long and tangled history of this problem, I do not believe that a British initiative at this moment on the lines suggested by my hon. and learned Friend would be useful.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government will adopt the suggestions in paragraph 292(b) of the Plowden Committee's Report on Representational Services Overseas that persons who have to be repatriated by consular officers should, except in cases of genuine and unpredictable hardship, pay a fee for administrative expenses.

Yes, Sir. It is proposed that a fee of £3 should be charged for the repatriation from a foreign country to the United Kingdom by a British consular officer of a person resident in the United Kingdom who is in temporary financial difficulties. A similar fee will be charged by British High Commissioners for the repatriation of such persons from Commonwealth countries. If a family is repatriated together, only one fee will be charged. Arrangements will be made as soon as possible to give statutory effect to this proposal.

Does this mean that anyone who wants to be repatriated and has £3 can of right claim repatriation?

No. Sir. Consular officers are authorised to grant repatriation facilities only as a last resort. They will, of course, continue to deal with cases of genuine distress with common sense and compassion.

Would the hon. Gentleman agree that the total of unrecovered expenses incurred by consular officers in respect of British subjects who require repatriation amounts to a very large sum of money indeed?

Yes, Sir. Last year the total cost of the repatriation services was £60,000. About two-thirds of this was recovered.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what representations to the Congo Prime Minister, Mr. Tshombe, concerning the safety of British subjects in the Congo were made by Her Majesty's Government whilst he was in Paris.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a further statement about the safety of British subjects in the Congo.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will convey to the rebel leaders in the Congo the offer of a substantial reward, in cash or cattle, for each hostage of British or Commonwealth nationality returned unharmed within the next three weeks.

As the Answer is long, I will, with permission, answer these Questions at the end of Questions.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what new arrangements have been made in the Foreign Office for the handling of news and public relations.

There has been no change in the machinery in the Foreign Office for handling news and public relations.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister said about ten days ago that a new appointment had been made to assist the chief information officer of the Foreign Office? Is he further aware that the Plowden Report expressly supports the arrangement by which news and information work in the Foreign Service is dealt with by career members of that Service? Why does he think that a former employee of the Labour Party is better able to do it than they are?

I am aware of the recommendation of the Plowden Report. This appointment does not affect the principle of that recommendation. It is entirely in line with similar personal appointments made by the previous Administration.

Is it a fact that a person who was a representative of the Labour Party has been appointed to this office? Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the reputation of the information service in the Foreign Office has hitherto been extremely high and has been the envy of foreign services all over the world? Does the hon. Gentleman think it appropriate that a purely party political representative should be appointed to this information service?

It is perhaps important that the facts of this matter be put very plainly to the House so that the kind of misrepresentations made in that supplementary question are not allowed to lie. There is no change in the machinery in relation to news and public relations in the Foreign Office. The appointment which has been made is of a special assistant to the Foreign Secretary to help with research and contacts with all sections of the British Press. Naturally, he works in close liaison with the head of the News Department and other appropriate departments of the Foreign Office. There is no change in the responsibility of the News Department for dealing with Press inquiries about Her Majesty's Government's foreign policy.

Is not the real purpose of this appointment suitably to present foreign affairs news to the Left wing of the Labour Party?

As I have said, the appointment is entirely in line with previous appointments. For instance, it is very much in line with the appointment of the noble Lord, Lord Egremont, then Mr. John Wyndham, who fulfilled somewhat similar functions for Mr. Harold Macmillan when he was at the Foreign Office and later at No. 10 Downing Street.

That was a quite different appointment. It has been accepted for a very long time that Prime Ministers make personal appointments of that sort. Did the hon. Gentleman say that this appointee has contact with all sections of the Press, and does he therefore disseminate information which he obtains from the Foreign Office?

I do not accept that this appointment is any different from the precedent set by the previous Administration. The functions of the new appointee are to maintain contact with all sections of the Press, but to leave the existing relationship between the News Department and the diplomatic correspondents accredited to the Foreign Office entirely as it is at the moment.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress made towards reaching a peaceful settlement of the Indonesian dispute.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement about the Government's policy towards an easing of the situation between Indonesia and Malaysia.

The Indonesian Government have stepped up their attacks on Eastern Malaysia, and have sent forces to make landings on the Malayan mainland. Her Majesty's Government deplore the situation created by these attacks on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a member of the Commonwealth to whom this country has specific defence obligations. We shall continue to honour these obligations to the full. We should welcome a peaceful solution of the conflict between Indonesia and Malaysia, but the resumption of negotiations is principally a matter for the two countries concerned. At the moment, an atmosphere conducive to negotiation unhappily does not exist.

As there is little prospect at present for a peaceful settlement, is the hon. Gentleman satisfied with the common policy being carried out by the free world Powers who have interests in South-East Asia? Is he satisfied with the support which the free world Powers are giving each other in South-East Asia, particularly in Indonesia, especially in view of the reported threat of a take-over by the Communists in Djarkarta and the action of the frigate "Ajax" in the Malacca Straits?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, Australia and New Zealand are providing substantial financial assistance for Malaysia's defence, and their troops have been in action against Indonesian infiltrators. The United States and Canada have both recently sent military missions to consider what aid they could furnish. Other Commonwealth countries have given diplomatic support.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. I should like to ask him whether he knows of the report in The Times on 1st December in which its representatives in Kuala Lumpur indicated that there were certain diplomats in Kuala Lumpur who felt that there was a great noise going on and a further military operation was expected, but that there was a feeling that there could be a peaceful solution if certain initiatives were taken?

There is more than a noise going on. There have been landings on the territory of Malaysia. As I have said, we are always anxious for the opportunity for peaceful negotiation to take place.

Can my hon. Friend say why this situation is being allowed to drift into a state of near-war if not actual war? In view of these acts of aggression, why is not the matter taken before the Security Council of the United Nations with a view to action being taken to secure a peaceful settlement? Meanwhile, would it not be possible to send a force of United Nations observers, who could report on the facts without fear or favour?

I do not accept that the situation is drifting. In September, Malaysia requested a Security Council debate, in which all members of the Council other than the two Soviet bloc representatives supported her complaint. The Security Council remains formally seized of the problem. To reopen the question with the United Nations is primarily a matter for Malaysia to decide. Since the September debate, the Malaysian Government have sent four letters to the Council drawing attention to further Indonesian attacks.

Can my hon. Friend assure the House that units of the Royal Navy in those waters have sufficient freedom of action to defend not only the State of Malaysia but their own ships and men?

That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence.

Since British troops are involved in this dangerous and unhappy situation, will not the Government urge upon the United Nations, as my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) has suggested, that observers should be sent?

We will certainly consult our allies and the Government of Malaysia about the suggestion made by my right hon. and learned Friend.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs if he will publish a transcript of the speeches made during his last meeting with European Free Trade Association Ministers.

As my hon. Friend stated on 30th November, in reply to a Question from the hon. Member for Walthamstow, East (Mr. John Harvey), proceedings at meetings of the Ministerial Council of the European Free Trade Association are confidential.

Would the hon. Gentleman not admit that, in view of the oft-repeated statement by Government spokesmen that the E.F.T.A. countries showed a considerable amount of sympathy for and understanding of our position, and apparently freely accepted our abrogation of the Treaties entered into with them, publication of their agreement to these things would serve • good purpose from every point of view?

As these discussions are confidential, I am sure the hon. Gentleman would not want me to do more than refer him to the communiqué of the meeting which has been placed in the Library of the House of Commons.

Are the conversations confidential or unprintable?

The conversations are, of course, confidential. Certainly, were they to be printed they would be found to be highly intelligent conversations on all sides.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs at what time and on what date the decision of Her Majesty's Government to impose the 15 per cent. surcharge was imparted to the United States Government; and by what method this information was conveyed.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs on what date, at what time, and how, the Governments of the United Kingdom's partners in the European Free Trade Asosciation were informed of Her Majesty's Government's intention to impose a 15 per cent. surcharge on imports.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs on what dates, at what times, by what methods, and where, notification of Her Majesty's Government's unilateral decision to impose a 15 per cent. surcharge on imports was given to the United States of America, the European Free Trade Association, and other European countries, respectively.

Messages were sent through British Embassies over the weekend of 24th and 25th October to the Governments of the countries of the European Free Trade Association and of the United States, in which full notification was given of the measures to be announced on 26th October. Messages were sent to the Governments of other European countries at the same time as the measures were announced.

Could the hon. Gentleman be more forthcoming? Could he tell us the true facts of this case? Were our American allies in fact informed about this matter 48 hours before our E.F.T.A. partners? Can we have an answer, yes or no?

I can assure the House that any difference in the timing of the messages to these Governments was not significant.

Oh.

Dodgy.

Could the hon. Gentleman make plain what, in these circumstances, he regards as a significant delay? If it was 48 hours, is he saying that 48 hours in these circumstances was insignificant? Is it not a fact that the Americans themselves questioned the wisdom of their having been informed before our E.F.T.A. partners?

No doubt the hon. Gentleman refers to the fact that Sir Eric Roll was in Washington. The duties of our Executive Director in the I.M.F., who is also Economic Minister in Her Majesty's Embassy in Washington, were to discuss monetary questions with that body and the United States authorities responsible for the other reserve currency, the dollar. In the course of discussions over the weekend, the I.M.F. and the U.S. authorities were informed of Her Majesty's Government's economic measures.

Would the hon. Gentleman say 48 hours in these circumstances is not very significant?

Frankly, in view of the fact that all was due to the bungling—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—of the British economic problems by the party opposite, these supplementary questions really are impertinent.

Can we have an answer? [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down."] Were the Americans informed 48 hours before our E.F.T.A. partners?

Answer.

On a point of order. In view of the hon. Gentleman's inability to answer this Question, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter at the earliest opportunity.

Why do not hon. Members stand up for their country for a change?

On a point of order. I do not know whether I heard aright, but I believe I heard the right hon. Member say something I particularly dislike—

The target appeared to be of a very general character.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the overflying rights accorded by the Sudanese Government.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) on 7th December.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government will now exercise the right reserved to them, in the assurance given to the Brussels Treaty powers in October, 1954, about the maintenance of United Kingdom forces on the Continent of Europe, to invite the North Atlantic Council to review the financial conditions on which these formations are maintained, on the ground that their maintenance in present conditions throws too heavy a strain on the external finances of the United Kingdom.

No, Sir.

Would my hon. Friend recall that the assurance given was in the following terms, that if the maintenance of United Kingdom forces on the Continent of Europe throws at any time too heavy a strain on the external finance of the United Kingdom it will inform the North Atlantic Council who will review the financial conditions on which formations are maintained? Why do not the Government put this to the N.A.T.O. Council? Why do we have to bear this burden when there is a strain on our finances, as all the evidence shows? Does he not think that the old-age pensioners would like us to get tough with Germany rather than get tough with them?

I am, of course, aware of the provisions to which my hon. Friend refers, but I do not think they need to be invoked at the present time.

Could the hon. Gentleman say whether some of his back benchers stick up for their own country?

Answer.

asked the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs what recent incursions there have been by Yemeni Republican forces into the Federation of South Arabia; and what action he proposes to take to prevent these raids in future.

On 4th December a force of about 250 Yemeni tribesmen invaded Federal territory and opened fire on a village seven miles on the Federal side of the border. They were engaged by Federal forces but remained on Federal territory until 6th December when air strikes were made against them. Federal territory is now reported to be clear of any Yemeni force.

Has any reply been received from the Republican authorities in the Yemen to these representations, and has any complaint been lodged with the United Nations against these armed raids? If they continue, will the Government consider taking suitable retaliatory action in the frontier areas?

My noble Friend, Lord Caradon, sent a letter to the President of the Security Council about this question, pointing out that it is the culmination of a series of incidents and attacks on Federal territory which have been reported to the Security Council during the last few months. Last April the British representative at the United Nations put forward a proposal for the stationing of United Nations observers along both sides of the border between South Arabia and the Yemen as a useful means of reinforcing the Security Council's call to avoid incidents and to reduce tension on the border. The Republican authorities in the Yemen did not respond favourably, but at this moment I do not think Her Majesty's Government can accept the hon. Gentleman's suggestion.

Could the hon. Gentleman say whether any representations or protests have been made or will be made to the United Arab Republic as the real source and inspiration of this kind of incursion into British-protected territory?

We have no evidence that the U.A.R. authorities in the Yemen were directly involved in this incident, but reports indicate that the Yemini forces had been well-armed and well- trained.

Why cannot the hon. Gentleman respond to my suggestion? It is a perfectly reasonable one. Are the Government serious in expressing their willingness to defend the Federation in accordance with our Treaty obligations to do so? It would not appear so unless they are prepared to take seriously the sort of suggestion I made.

I can only repeat the assurance which my right hon. Friend the Colonial Secretary gave on 11th December after his return from Aden, that under the terms of the 1959 Treaty with the Federation the Government are bound to protect the Federation from external attack, and that we fully intend to carry out our obligations.