asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on his recent visits to Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia.

My visits to Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were at the invitation of the respective Ministers for Foreign Affairs. I welcomed this opportunity to meet and exchange views on a wide range of topics with representatives of the two Governments. In both countries I found a lively interest in strengthening co-operation between us, particularly in the technical and economic field.

I am arranging for copies of the communiqués issued in Belgrade and Prague to be placed in the Library of the House.

Is the Secretary of State aware that it has been reported that at his Press conference in Prague he made a number of party political points? Does not he agree that this is a departure from the practice usually adopted by Ministers when travelling abroad?

I do not accept that. In any case, there is a later Question on that.

When my right hon. Friend was in Prague, did he receive a copy of the important statement made by Prime Minister Pham Van Dong on behalf of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam in reply to President Johnson's speech, in the course of which he advanced Hanoi's views of a political settlement and the basis for a conference?

I have seen that statement. I do not recall whether it reached me when I was in Prague or at some other point. My hon. Friend has a Question for Written Answer on this matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is reported as having said in Prague that he would welcome a conference on European security? Can he say anything more about that?

I also said that I thought that there were certain conditions that have to be met for that and that it would require careful preparation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will discuss with the Governments of European countries the extension of passport free travel and the removal of other obstacles to travellers between Europe and the United Kingdom.

We already have bilateral agreements with a substantial number of European countries, permitting people from this country to travel on simplified "British visitors passports" for short-term visits. In return we have negotiated agreements under which the nationals of some of these countries can enter Britain for visits up to three months on production of an identity card and a British Visitors Card. We are at present discussing the extension of these arrangements to Austria.

Welcome though these improvements are, my hon. Friend will be aware that there are other obstacles, including the very slow and tedious Customs facilities, which compare very badly with other parts of Europe. Will he recall the hope expressed some years ago by Ernest Bevin about getting rid of passports and going where-ever he wanted? Will my right hon. Friend say that we are working in that direction?

Yes, I recall Ernest Bevin's famous phrase very well, and it is the purpose of the present Government to move in that direction. I will certainly bear my hon. Friend's remarks in mind in this consideration.

In what respect do the new documents issued to British citizens by the Gibraltar Passport Office differ from the old, and why have these changes been made?

That is a quite different question.

In view of the recent misunderstandings over the issue of passports to "beat" groups and others, will the Minister of State make it perfectly plain that it is the right of every British citizen to have a passport on request, subject to considerations of a criminal nature?

Yes; I am glad to have the opportunity to make it clear that it is the right of every citizen to have a passport. Equally, there is an obligation on every Government to give good advice to their younger citizens about some of the dangers of employment overseas.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further steps he will now take to increase functional co-operation with European countries.

Following the various visits which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I have recently undertaken to European capitals, we are now considering, together with the European Governments concerned, the possibilities of practical collaboration in the fields of aircraft development and other advanced technologies. We would like to see this co-operation develop on as wide a basis as possible, both in regard to subjects and to country participation.

Would this be a convenient moment for my right hon. Friend to say something about relations between E.F.T.A. and the Common Market?

I think that that would arise more appropriately on a later Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will seek to arrange for the first permanent United Nations base to be located at the British sovereign base at Dhekelia, in Cyprus.

Her Majesty's Government are always ready to consider what assistance they can give with United Nations peacekeeping, including help made available from our overseas bases. A permanent United Nations base would, however, only be relevant in terms of a permanent United Nations force. This is not practicable at present. The most effective way of making progress is by earmarking national contingents and Her Majesty's Government have, as the House knows, offered substantial logistic support for this. In these circumstances, the need for a permanent United Nations base as such does not arise.

While thanking the Minister for his reply, may I ask him to bear in mind the very acute crisis existing at the moment with regard to the Jordan Waters? Is he aware that only this weekend the Jordan Prime Minister announced his intention to begin diversion of those waters? We would seem to need a permanent U.N. force in that area and that is why I am asking for a permanent U.N. base.

I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, but our view in connection with the dangers in the Middle East is that action through the United Nations offers the best prospects of maintaining peace in that area. The facilities of the sovereign base at Dhekelia were made available with the establishment of the United Nations force in Cyprus. We should be ready to make similar facilities available if a United Nations force were to be set up to deal with any threat to peace in the Middle East.

Would the hon. Gentleman comment on the report of the United Nations Mediator?

The British bases to which my hon. Friend refers in his Question are not part of the Republic of Cyprus and are, therefore, not involved in any way in the Cyprus dispute.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make representations to the Commission of the European Economic Community in connection with the proposed European Patents Convention in so far as it affects British interests.

The views of Her Majesty's Government as given to the House by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade on 2nd February have been explained fully to the Commission of the European Economic Community.

Can the hon. Gentleman give any further indication whether we are likely to be able to reach a satisfactory agreement with the Community on this issue? If not, as seems likely to be the case, would he not agree that this is yet a further example of the necessity for reaching agreement with the Community which would be based firmly on full membership and that any alternative form of ad hoc bridge building would not meet the case?

The latter part of the supplementary question raises wider issues. On the question of patents, Her Majesty's Government have made it clear that they wish to take part as full members in the European Patents Convention. The Council of Ministers at the E.E.C. have instructed the Commission to carry out further work on this subject and in doing so we trust they will take full account of our desire to be full members.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, if he will make a statement on the progress made by Her Majesty's Government towards an international agreement on the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons.

Non-dissemination will, of course, be one of the major questions to be discussed by the United Nations Disarmament Commission, now in session in New York, and we hope that this meeting will provide a new impetus towards a non-dissemination agreement. It is still our view that the most useful body for the detailed consideration of disarmament measures is the Geneva Conference, and we hope that the Disarmament Commission will support this view.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that one of the main reasons advanced by the Communist countries in the past for not signing an agreement on non-dissemination has been the proposal for an M.L.F.? Is it not clear that they are now advancing the same objections in relation to the A.N.F.?

Yes, Sir, though, as has been pointed out, those objections are baseless.

Can the right hon. Gentleman indicate when the disarmament conference at Geneva is likely to meet? Does he really expect any progress in this important field from the conference in the United Nations?

I made clear a little while ago that we were disappointed that the Soviet Union were not prepared jointly with the United States to bring the Geneva Conference together again and that progress in the United Nations Disarmament Commission was bound to be slower. What I am hoping is that the Disarmament Commission will reach a resumption of the conference at Geneva, and then on this question we can make progress.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the credentials of the new West German ambassador were accepted, in view of his previous political and diplomatic history.

I would refer the hon. Lady to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Driberg) on 29th March.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this person joined the Nazi Party in 1938 when he was employed at the German Embassy in Washington where he could have sought asylum if he had been opposed to the Nazi ideology? Is he also aware that this man was sufficiently highly placed to be sent to inspect the Warsaw Ghetto in 1941 and that after then he continued to serve Hitler in Switzerland in the German Embassy there where he could have sought political asylum if he was shocked, as he said he was, by what he saw in Warsaw? Is my hon. Friend also aware that he was—

Order. The Minister must answer the biography as far as it has got.

All the relevant facts about Herr Blankenhorn were carefully considered by Her Majesty's Government in accepting his appointment here as the ambassador of the Federal German Republic. It is true, as my hon. Friend says, that Herr Blankenhorn was a member of the Nazi Party in 1938 but this was at a time when it was hardly possible to have any post of responsibility in the German foreign service without becoming at least a nominal member. I think the House will wish to bear in mind, with its customary fair-mindedness, that he was associated later with the anti-Hitler group in Germany.

Is it not a fact that all British diplomatists who have known this gentleman have a high opinion of him and regard him as a good friend of this country and of European democracy?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will seek to make arrangements with countries in Western Europe whereby the civil authorities in those countries will be responsible for informing the next of kin of British subjects who are confined to hospital as a result of serious injury.

Arrangements already exist in all countries in Western Europe for the prompt notification of such accidents either to the nearest British Consul or to a relative. Our consular officers pass this information on by the quickest and most reliable means.

In France, which I believe is the country which the hon. Member has chiefly in mind, the police and gendarmerie are under standing instructions to make such notification. The Government cannot, of course, guarantee that there will be no mistakes or delays on the part of foreign authorities.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for his full reply, may I ask whether he can go further and tell us who is really responsible for informing relatives and friends of British subjects? Is it the gendarmerie, the police or the hospital authorities? I ask this particularly in the light of the sad incident concerning Miss Katrina Cheeseman, and other more recent accidents. Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that considerable concern still exists amongst those who travel on the Continent, especially the holidaymaker?

I am very conscious of the sad incidents to which the hon. Gentleman referred. I have made inquiries, and in France it is still only the responsibility of the police to make the necessary reports.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is now the policy of Her Majesty's Government regarding diplomatic recognition of the State of East Germany.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 25th March.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his reply, may I ask whether he would not agree that this reply which he quoted is directly contrary to the policy advocated by the Prime Minister in earlier debates when in opposition?

No, Sir.

May I then ask if the right hon. Gentleman will read the debates on 20th December, 1961, and 5th July, 1962, on both of which occasions the Prime Minister advocated a sort of recognition of East Germany?

The noble Lord will find, if he studies those debates, that that was mentioned in connection with a wider settlement and is not to be considered as a proposal on its own.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has about the proposed new compensation terms for people persecuted by the Nazis on grounds of nationality, in comparison with people persecuted on grounds of race, religion or politics, and about the reasons for this continued discrimination; and what views he has expressed to the Federal German Government on this matter.

The draft legislation is still before the Restitution Committee of the Bundestag and precise information about the Committee's proposals will not be available until they present their report as they are expected to do soon. The Federal authorities have been made aware of the feeling in the United Kingdom on this issue and of Her Majesty's Government's sympathy for the requests made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on behalf of victims persecuted on the grounds of nationality, among others.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are still some highly unsatisfactory aspects of the draft law; that, for instance, a German who suffered 25 per cent. disability in a concentration camp can make a claim, whereas a Pole or Czech must have suffered a 50 per cent. disability in a forced labour camp before they can make a claim? Is he also aware that there is noticeable unjustifiable discrimination where hereditability is concerned, and that there are very strong feelings on this subject on both sides of the House? Will he do his best to make sure that the draft law is further improved?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of these anomalies and of the feeling on both sides of the House about the matter. We have made representations on this subject on many occasions, the last time as late as 28th April, and we hope that the Federal German Republic will take account of the representations that we have been making.

Would my hon. Friend also take into consideration the necessity of emphasising to the German authorities the importance of ensuring that those who were unable before 1953 to lodge their claims because they were behind the Iron Curtain or were in other respects unable to do so, should have equal treatment with those who justifiably were given compensation in respect of their claims which were made before?

That is another question. These are complicated matters, and I should be grateful if the hon. Gentleman would put the Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement about the disappearance of a Foreign Office official from a Baltic Island in March.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is satisfied with the results of investigations made into the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of a Foreign Office official from a Baltic island in March; and if he will make a statement.

The hon. Members are no doubt referring to Mr. John Echevarria, a member of the British Military Government staff in Berlin, who was reported missing from the Baltic Island of Fehmarn on Sunday, 14th March.

Investigations have been carried out by the German police and a member of the Staff of the British Military Government, Berlin, has also visited the island to make inquiries. No definite conclusion has been reached and the police have listed Mr. Echevarria as a missing person. The most likely explanation of the disappearance seems to be that Mr. Echevarria, who was spending the weekend studying possible diving sites, lost his footing on the slippery surface of a mole and fell into the icy water.

May I express my sympathy, and I am sure that of the House, with the family in this tragic accident? Can the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that no security implication is involved in this? I believe that such an assurance would satisfy the family and the public. Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that everything was done at the time to investigate this tragic accident?

Yes, Sir. I should like to express the Government's sympathy in this tragic accident. I can assure the hon. Member on the point which he raises. Mr. Echevarria was concerned with accounts and administrative duties and had access to very few classified papers. Such papers as he would have seen would have been of no particular interest to anyone outside Her Majesty's Government. Therefore, there is no security issue involved in this.

Can the hon. Gentlemen say whether, as this man's family believes, his passport was in the car when he and his companions left it on the 14th and was not found there when the car was discovered the following day? Is this a fact and has this been taken into account in the course of the investigations made? Will the hon. Gentleman assure the House and the family that they will be kept aware of any discovery made as a result of further inquiries?

Yes, Sir. The Government are keeping closely in touch with the inquiries as they are being pursued and we should certainly communicate any information we obtain as quickly as possible. The point about the passport has been looked into. What the hon. Member says about it is right. I understand that Mr. Echevarria was in the habit of taking the passport with him wherever he went and therefore I do not think that one should draw conclusions from that fact.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations have been made to him by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament about the war in Vietnam; and what reply he has sent.

Between 8th February and 29th April, 39 letters relating to the situation in Vietnam were received at the Foreign Office from branches of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Replies have been sent setting out Her Majesty's Government's views and policy and, where appropriate, drawing attention to the statements which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I have made in this House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament also appeals to Ministers in the Government who are sympathetic to it to work within the Government to express the views of the C.N.D.? Would the hon. Gentleman agree with the Prime Minister that noisy demonstrations, such as the C.N.D. has been making about Vietnam, are not the right thing at present and that the right things now are skilful diplomacy and firm strength?

It has been made quite clear what the whole Government's view is on this matter, and that has been made clear in the replies sent to the letters from the C.N.D.

Can my right hon. Friend say when the "war" referred to in the Question was officially declared, what country made the official declaration, and whether Britain was consulted beforehand?

I can be responsible for the answers, but not for the wording of the Question. I think that everyone knows what was meant by the use of this word and that the effect of what has been happening in Vietnam has been as cruel and unhappy as any in any declared war would be.

On a point of Order. May I have your guidance on this matter, Mr. Speaker? I have often submitted Questions which have been declared unsuitable because the Minister had no responsibility. Surely, if this Question is tabled the Minister ought to have responsibility for any reference to any war in which this country seems now to be engaged.

What the right hon. Gentleman was saying was that he was not responsible for interpreting the words used in the Question. It would be a bit hard to make him do that.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made in his efforts, as co-chairman, to find among the Powers concerned a basis for the settlement of the problem of Vietnam.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the result of his invitation, as co-chairman, to the Powers concerned to provide a basis for settling the Vietnam problem.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's recent diplomatic actions concerning Vietnam.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress he has made in his attempts to create conditions for bringing the war in Vietnam to an end.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a further statement on progress towards a peace settlement in Vietnam.

I still await the full results of the two initiatives about which I told the House during the Foreign Affairs debate on 1st April. So far my message to members of the Geneva Conference and the International Control Commission has been answered directly by four of those to whom it was addressed. Mr. Gordon Walker has yet to complete his tour of the Far East and to make his report. Unhappily neither these initiatives nor those from other quarters—such as the appeal of the 17 non-aligned nations for negotiations without pre-conditions and the efforts of the United Nations Secretary General—have produced anything other than a negative response from Hanoi and Peking. We hope this intransigent attitude will change. Once it does, we should be able to make progress towards a peaceful settlement.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very deep concern in all parts of the country, and I hope on all sides of the House, at the continued escalation of the war in Vietnam? Is he aware that that concern is that of people not pro-Communist or indeed anti-American? Will he continue to use his best offices, even himself going to the area, to try to get some kind of consultation direct with Peking or Hanoi as a further earnest of his good endeavours in this matter?

I agree with my right hon. Friend that anxiety over this matter is universal. The Government certainly will continue their efforts, despite discouragement, to get a peaceful and right settlement of this dispute. I will consider what my hon. Friend said about a visit myself, but I am obliged to notice at present that Peking and Hanoi refuse to receive Mr. Gordon Walker, who is representing me as co-chairman, and I wish that we had had a more helpful attitude over that.

Is there still any prospect of a conference on Cambodia and has anything yet been achieved by Mr. Gordon Walker's Far Eastern tour?

The situation on Cambodia is as I stated it in my statement to the House recently. There is nothing further to tell the House since then. It would be better to wait until Mr. Gordon Walker's return and his report to me before answering the rest of the hon. Gentleman's question.

On my Question No. 39, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend has considered sending specific invitations to the nations which are involved in this, with a view to having a peace conference and bringing that war to an end in that way?

Such invitations could be sent out if the other co-chairman and I were in agreement. It was in default of that agreement that we sent out the message we did. I hope that events may develop in the way in which my hon. and learned Friend expresses himself.

Since America and North Vietnam are in agreement on three major points, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend will press for a ceasefire and a conference on those three points, not necessarily via Cambodia? Would he do that now before the dètente between East and West is completely destroyed?

The position is that the United States have made it clear that if there is a cessation of the action by the North their action will cease straight away, and even indeed without that they are prepared to enter into a conference. Therefore, all that is missing there is a statement from Hanoi that they will fulfil their part of the cease-fire. If we got that the whole situation would be different.

Could the Foreign Secretary confirm that there has been close co-operation with the European Governments concerned with regard to a common European attitude towards the problem of Vietnam?

This is not only a European matter; it concerns all the Powers which met at Geneva. When we have been in contact with the European Governments, we have expressed our views on the matter, and the nearer we could get to a common European point of view the better. But we must remember that this is not only a European question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we on this side of the House fully support Her Majesty's Government in their support of an American policy in Vietnam, but will he explain how it was that his colleague the Minister of State, a former president of U.S.D.A.W., remained silent at the union's conference the other day when the union passed a resolution urging the Government to dissociate themselves from American policy in Vietnam?

I suggest, first, that, if the noble Lady wishes to question the conduct of my hon. Friend, she should do so direct to him; second, that she should acquaint herself a little more closely with trade union practice in this country; and, third, that there seems to be a difference between our points of view on this matter. I am trying, so far as it is possible, to stop a war. The noble Lady seems to be anxious to start a squabble.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps he is taking to economise on the expenses of embassies and legations overseas to help curtail Government spending overseas.

The expenses of all diplomatic posts overseas are regularly examined by visiting members of a trained corps of inspectors who are under standing instructions to look for and recommend all possible economies.

As the Government have already decided to curb overseas investment, some of which would redound to the credit of this country in the future, is it not for the Government to set an example and cut their own overseas expenditure?

Questions about overseas investment are a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that expenditure on entertainment and the expenses of embassies is very carefully accounted for and scrutinised and is used to further the aims of British foreign policy overseas.

Accepting, of course, the requirement for control of overseas expenditure, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that it is still the Government's policy to implement in full the recommendations of the Plowden Committee on the overseas representation service?

If the hon. Gentleman has any points in mind about the recommendations of the Plowden Committee, I should be glad to try to answer them. In general, the Government's policy is to implement the Plowden Report.

Is the Minister aware that practically every mission overseas is an embassy, and is he satisfied that there has not been an undue escalation of staff owing to this custom? Second, have the people who have been looking into economies at our embassies and legations had any success? Have our expenses in these matters increased or decreased?

The size and composition of staff at overseas embassies are kept under constant review and efforts are made to bring about reductions where appropriate, just as one has to face an increase of staff as circumstances change.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations he has made to the President of Egypt regarding the situation in the Yemen as it affects British interests; and whether he will make a statement.

We have made representations to the United Arab Republic authorities on several occasions about ground and air attacks from the Yemen upon South Arabian territory and about subversive activities against the Federation organised from the Yemen.

What estimate has the hon. Gentleman formed of the number of Egyptian troops currently in the Yemen, and what representations has he made about the intentions of the Egyptians regarding Aden and the Gulf?

As far as I am aware, there has been no change in the numbers of Egyptian troops, and, according to published reports, they are between 40,000 and 50,000. On the question of incursions into Federal territory, there have been a number of overflights by Egyptian aircraft, the most recent being of 12th, 13th and 15th April, and there was an air attack on Federal territory on 1st April. I took these matters up very strongly with the U.A.R. Minister in London only last week.

Is the Minister aware that Egyptian troops in the Yemen are using both napalm bombs and poison gas against unarmed tribesmen, and will he protest most strongly to the Egyptian Embassy in London and to the Egyptian Government in Cairo about this side of the matter?

There is another Question on the Order Paper about that.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made towards securing an international agreement to establish a nuclear-free zone in Central Europe.

Her Majesty's Government are always willing to give close and careful consideration to any proposals that would help to reduce tension in Central Europe provided that they fulfil the essential conditions which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has frequently stated. While there is no indication that these conditions could at present be met, I hope to look at the whole range of European security problems in my talks with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Foreign Ministers next week.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but does he agree that proposals for a nuclear-free zone in Central Europe represent a more constructive approach to the problem than plans for the creation of new nuclear organisations or alliances, and will he bear in mind that many of us are becoming a little impatient at the way in which the Federal German Government appear to be obstructing almost to the point of paralysis any constructive initiatives for a peaceful settlement of the Central European situation?

My hon. Friend will agree that progress in this matter is something which must be achieved between our allies and ourselves, and it was for that reason that I mentioned my talks with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Foreign Ministers next week.

Will the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Government's proposals for an A.N.F. are inconsistent with proposals for a nuclear-free zone in Central Europe since they involve giving the Germans access to land-based nuclear weapons in Central Europe, as opposed to the M.L.F. proposals which involved seaborne weapons?

No, I do not think that that is so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what Departmental arrangements he has made to ensure the continuous and progressive examination of the possibilities of closer relations with the European Economic Community.

The Foreign Office, in collaboration with the other Departments concerned, has this subject under constant review. I am satisfied that the present arrangements are entirely adequate.

Has any study been undertaken, or is such a study in course of being undertaken, in regard to the constitutional and legal implications which would arise from adherence by this country to the European Economic Community, and if so, is there any intention of publishing it?

There is no intention of publication, but this, of course, is one of the subjects which has to be, and is, studied.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, although there can be no objection raised to an examination of the possibilities of further co-operation with the countries of the Six on economic matters or in a functional context, there can be no question of association with the Six on the basis of the Treaty of Rome without regard to the conditions laid down by the Labour Party, which still remain the policy of Her Majesty's Government?

Yes, I have made clear in public statements that that is so, but my right hon. Friend will agree that, while the principles of those conditions remain, the kind of negotiations which would be needed to meet them may vary as time goes on and the impact of certain economic facts changes.

Is the Foreign Secretary convinced about one of the five conditions, that which insisted that the Government should have the right to determine the internal planning of this country's economy? As the Government are about to embark on the nationalisa- tion of steel, would not this inhibit them from entering the European Economic Community?

It certainly would not. The noble Lady and her hon. Friends must reserve her remarks on that subject to a more suitable occasion.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals he has made to the Soviet Government for disengagement in Europe; and if he will now announce the Government's detailed plans, and the extent of agreement reached with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation allies.

It was clear from my discussions with Mr. Gromyko in March that the Soviet Government still hold quite different views from the Western Powers on the settlement of European problems. Her Majesty's Government adhere to the view that arms control measures have to be considered in relation to a political settlement in Europe and, in particular, to the reunification of Germany. Our allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation fully agree with us on this. These differences with the Soviet Government cannot be easily or quickly reconciled, but we shall continue to strive for agreement.

As disengagement in Europe has been the keystone of Socialist foreign policy for at least eight years, since the present Minister of Defence wrote his Fabian tract, "A Neutral Belt in Europe", does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that it comes as a great disappointment to many people who took these proposals as practicable and at their face value that virtually no progress whatsoever has been made in this direction so far?

As I said in reply to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Park) a short time ago, these are not matters which can be carried through without the concurrence of a number of other Governments, for which we shall have to seek.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that proposals for political disengagement and for a freeze on nuclear weapons in Central Europe are really very different, and does he feel that it is wise to impose a political link with proposals concerned purely with arms control? Has past experience in this field been very encouraging?

On this particular question, we must regard these two matters as very closely related.

Mr. Arthur Henderson—Question No. 24.

On a point order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask for your advice? A few minutes ago, the Minister of State informed me that he was unable to answer a supplementary question from me as it arose on another Question on the Order Paper later. As this Question, No. 23, has not been called, would it be possible for the Minister of State now to answer my question?

I do not think that the Minister said that he could not answer, but the effect was that he would not. His hopes in the matter were disappointed. I cannot help the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the recent discussions on the disarmament problem.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals Her Majesty's Government have made to the United Nations Disarmament Commission now sitting in New York; and whether he will make a statement.

The United Nations Disarmament Commission now meeting in New York provides an opportunity for a general debate on disarmament questions. In his speech to the Commission on 28th April, my noble Friend the Minister of State with special responsibility for disarmament explained the directions in which we believe that progress ought to, and could, be made in the disarmament field. Our objectives include an agreement on the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons, the extension of the partial nuclear test ban treaty to include underground tests, and President Johnson's proposal for a freeze of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles, which might perhaps be combined with the destruction of some of these weapons.

We hope that the general debate in the Disarmament Commission will be followed by an early resumption of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee in Geneva.

In view of the failure to make any real progress in the disarmament negotiations, will Her Majesty's Government give serious consideration to President de Gaulle's proposal that there should be a five-nuclear-Power conference, to include Communist China?

I have considered this, but, as my right hon. and learned Friend will remember from what I wrote to him on this matter, there are difficulties about it. One is the attitude of the Chinese Government themselves. The other is the resentment which this might cause among certain non-nuclear Powers. These objections do not permanently rule out this possibility, but they are at present a serious obstacle.

While we all want a non-dissemination pact, will my right hon. Friend recognise that it is only a short-term measure and that, so long as the arms race goes on, we shall have crisis after crisis all round the world? Will he press forward with proposals for a general disarmament treaty based on a compromise between the American and the Soviet drafts?

My right hon. Friend will notice that I mentioned non-dissemination as only one of our objectives. While I agree that it is important to try to get a general treaty, it is also desirable, where there is the possibility of partial agreement, to try to get it, because every agreement one makes in that way not only has value in itself but tends to reduce the amount of mistrust and make further progress easier.

If one is to judge from the speech of the Minister of State in New York, is it not a fact that Her Majesty's Government have no new proposals to make on disarmament?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now consider making an official visit to China, in view of the situation in South-East Asia.

I have nothing to add to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to my hon. Friend the Member for Brighouse and Spenborough (Mr. Jackson) on 25th March this year.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I point out that the situation has deteriorated since he gave his reply to my hon. Friend? Does he not think that, with the great prestige which he possesses, he would have considerable success if he were to visit China? As some countries of the Commonwealth have now become involved in the matter, which threatens to divide the Commonwealth, does he not think that it is time for him to make this approach?

I would remind my hon. Friend—and I said this in answer to a previous Question—that we have had this disappointing refusal of the Chinese Government to accept Mr. Gordon Walker as my representative. I would also draw my hon. Friend's attention to what I said earlier. I do not think that at present I can add anything to what I said.

Would it not be more appropriate to send the Minister of Technology to China?

Before the Foreign Secretary makes up his mind whether to go or not, will he give an undertaking to the House that he will publish Mr. Gordon Walker's report or, if not, that he will make a detailed statement on it to the House?

I shall certainly make a statement on it to the House. I will go no further than that.

Would my right hon. Friend consider what his reply might be if the Chinese People's Republic were to ask him to receive a Chinese private citizen in order to discuss grave matters involving international crises at the present time?

If I were asked to receive a personal representative of the Chinese Foreign Minister I should be very willing to do so—I mean, an appropriately accredited personal representative, such as Mr. Gordon Walker is. I certainly should not want to shut the door in such a situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what negotiations have been conducted in respect of a proposed new Anglo-American alliance in South-East Asia.

None, Sir.

Would my right hon. Friend make it quite clear that any Press reports to that effect are incorrect? Will he make it quite clear that no such alliance is in fact contemplated and that it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to extract themselves from South-East Asia as soon as the circumstances permit?

The British and United States Government are both members of S.E.A.T.O. As I have told my hon. Friend, there are no negotiations in respect of a proposed new Anglo-American alliance in South-East Asia and any reports which there may have been to the contrary effect are incorrect.

Is my right hon. Friend telling us that under S.E.A.T.O. Britain and the United States have exactly the same obligations? Is it not the case that the United States' acceptance of S.E.A.T.O. is reserved?

I was not suggesting that. I was saying, to make things quite clear, that there is this alliance in existence but that there are no negotiations in respect of any proposed new alliance.

Surely, apart from our association in the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation, both this country and the United States have a continuing and abiding interest in resisting, and determination to resist, Communist aggression and insurgence, wherever it might arise.

Yes, but the Question was not about interests. It was specifically about negotiations for a new alliance.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made by Mr. Patrick Gordon Walker in his mission to South-East Asia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the terms of reference given to Mr. Gordon Walker for the interviews he has undertaken in Asia; with whom interviews have taken place; what were the subjects discussed; and what were the results achieved.

Mr. Gordon Walker's terms of reference were to visit South-East Asia as my Special Representative to discuss the problems of the area with the Governments concerned and to report his impressions to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and myself. He had discussions with the Burmese Head of State, the Prime Ministers of Thailand, South Vietnam, Malaysia, Laos and Japan, and with the Foreign Ministers of these countries and of Cambodia, as well as with other people able to provide useful information. The principal subjects discussed were the conflict in Vietnam and the Soviet proposal for a conference on Cambodia. Mr. Gordon Walker has not yet returned to London with his report, so it is too early for me to state the final results of his tour.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that Mr. Walker is still holding himself available for discussions with Hanoi and Peking? Can he give the House any idea when Mr. Walker will be returning to this country if his efforts at this kind of negotiation prove unfruitful?

If we were now to get an indication that Hanoi or Peking would receive Mr. Gordon Walker, most certainly he would go there. Failing that, he will be back here very shortly.

Will the Foreign Secretary state what steps he has taken to make it clear to the Governments in South-East Asia that Mr. Gordon Walker has behind him the whole weight of Her Majesty's Government in Britain? Secondly, when Mr. Gordon Walker returns to this country will his report be debated in the House?

It was made very clear, when we sent out the request to the Governments concerned to receive Mr. Gordon Walker, what his position was. The question of a debate is not one for me. Of course the House will be made acquainted with the substance of Mr. Gordon Walker's report.

In view of the Foreign Secretary's statement concerning the terms of reference of Mr. Gordon Walker being concerned mainly with fact finding and his having no authority to negotiate, can the Foreign Secretary say in what respect these visits will be useful compared with the usual diplomatic channels?

I think that it would be right for me not to comment on that until the tour is complete and I have Mr. Gordon Walker's report. I have found during the last few weeks that the interim reports which I have received from him on conversations have been useful. This is an extremely difficult matter. We are faced with much intransigence on the other side. I believe that this particular adventure, this particular initiative, had good prospects of being useful and is being useful, and I think that it deserves the support of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what approaches he has made to Indonesia for the discussion of outstanding questions of mutual concern; and whether he will make a statement.

Discussion with Indonesia of Indonesia's arbitrary policy of hostility and aggression against Malaysia is primarily a matter for the Governments of Malaysia and Indonesia. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in the Foreign Affairs debate on 1st April, Her Majesty's Government do not contemplate any British initiative at this stage. We have made it clear that we would welcome, and do our best to promote, any move acceptable to Malaysia as offering a genuine prospect of restoring peace on a basis consistent with her independence and territorial integrity.

While thanking my hon. Friend for his reply, may I ask whether he does not agree that although this may be a matter primarily for Indonesia and Malaysia, nevertheless we are very much concerned? Is he not further aware that our friends in Australia and New Zealand are concerned at any deterioration in the South-East Asia situation?

Yes, Sir. The Government are both concerned and directly involved in this dispute. We have it very much in mind to do anything we can to help at a point at which it would be useful.

Did the Minister see an article by the defence correspondent of The Times in one issue last week in which he said that our forces there had been dropping propaganda leaflets on illiterate tribesmen? Could he tell us how the illiterate tribesmen were likely to read them?

I did not see this report, and I am extremely glad not to have the responsibility for what appears in The Times.

Has there been arty request from the Malaysian Government, or any other Commonwealth Government in the area affected, for Her Majesty's Government to take any further initiative?

There have been some very interesting and useful proposals from Japan. Mr. Kawashima, a leading Japanese politician, had offered his services to help in mediating, and we had hoped that these proposals might make some progress. Unfortunately, the kind of speech which President Soekarno made on May Day in Djakarta dashed these hopes.

Does the Minister recognise that this continued confrontation in South-East Asia is an element of great and dangerous insta- bility? Is it right that it should go on without any attempt to use the machinery of the United Nations to stop this aggression by Indonesia and to have impartial United Nations observers to report on the aggression?

The Government have given very careful and sympathetic consideration to the kind of proposal which my right hon. Friend put forward. The Malaysian Government, who have the primary responsibility for these initiatives, are keeping the Security Council continually informed of the acts of aggression by the Indonesians. The proposal which my right hon. Friend makes for observers has certain difficulties. The terrain is extremely difficult for placing observers. Apart from that, my right hon. Friend will recall that Indonesia walked out of the United Nations and that these arrangements would be bound to be one-sided.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will propose to the Governments of the United States of America and France a reaffirmation of the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 or a renegotiation of its terms.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the nature of United Kingdom commitments involved in the Tripartite Agreement; and what modifications in this agreement have been made since its origin.

I have nothing to add to the reply of my right honourable Friend the Prime Minister on 13th April.

Does not the Minister of State agree that the Middle East situation has been largely transformed since 1950 by reason of Soviet intervention in that area? Would not the Government consider proposing a quadrupartite declaration with a view to maintaining the balance of arms and peace in the Middle East?

I agree with my hon. Friend that there has been a big change in the situation in the Middle East since the original Tripartite Declaration. It was to take account of that change that the previous Prime Minister, Mr. Harold Macmillan, made his statement on 14th May, 1963, and that remains the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware of the varying interpretations of the Tripartite Agreement and that the American interpretation differs substantially from that of the United Kingdom and France? Has not the time arrived when there should be further consultation with the co-signatories of the Tripartite Agreement with a view to its revision and in order to make it more effective?

We are in regular consultation with both the Government of the United States and the Government of France about Middle Eastern problems and about the kind of situation which arises under both the Tripartite Declaration and the later statement to which I referred. I think that my right hon. Friend is right that these matters need continual consultation. We are all, of course, very anxious to seek any means of effective arms control in the area, but there are great difficulties in the way of such a scheme.

Will my hon. Friend take into consideration the grave importance of maintaining the Tripartite Agreement and similar agreements in consequence of the fact that the illegal attempt to stop water going to Israel has already been brought before the United Nations and that the Russians vetoed the question when it arose there? It is extremely important that some effective measures should be available in case an emergency arises.

As I think my hon. Friend knows, what the previous Government said and what the present Government say is that the United Nations ought to be the first body to deal with this matter, but we have said that we are ready to take action both within and outside the United Nations in the interests of peace.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that one or other of the courses suggested in the original Question could only contribute to the stability of the Middle East?

Mr. Arthur Henderson.

I am sorry, but I did not gather the import of the hon. Member's Question.

rose—

That is why I called another question. Mr. Arthur Henderson.

May we take it from the last reply of the Minister of State that Her Majesty's Government are not averse to entering into consultations with the Soviet Government with a view to securing agreement leading to a stabilised position in the Middle East?

Her Majesty's Government are always ready to seek means of arms control in the Middle East and in other troubled areas of the world.