asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress of the work of the United Nations Special Committee on Peace-Keeping.

The Special Committee on Peace-keeping Operations has for the past two years been working on a comprehensive report to be submitted to the General Assembly on United Nations military observer operations. Little progress has so far been made.

As a further step towards extending United Nations influence in areas where peace may be fragile, will the Government do everything possible inside and outside the United Nations to ensure that any Middle East settlement is reinforced by a restored United Nations presence, diplomatic and, if necessary, military?

It would be our wish that we as a member of the United Nations should help in any way possible with regard to the Middle East settlement. It is too early to say what the outcome will be, but we are in close touch with other parties concerned.

In view of the breach of the peace in Guinea recently, can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the mind and attitude of the Government towards this situation and what they propose to do in the United Nations?

This is a little wide of the Question. There has been a fact-finding Mission and the Security Council will be debating its report later today I think.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will now make a further statement on current negotiations with Libya.

I would refer to the Answer I gave the hon. Member on 16th November. The Libyan delegation to the current talks returned to Libya for the Muslim festivities at the end of Ramadan. We expect the talks to resume at a mutually convenient date, either here or in Tripoli.—[Vol. 806, c. 301–2.]

In view of the Foreign Secretary's recent statements on Resolution 242, which appear to place a different emphasis on this resolution, and in view of the close ties between Libya and Egypt, would the right hon. Gentleman give a firm undertaking that there can be no question of supplying Chieftain tanks to Libya?

I do not think I need comment on Resolution 242. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made our position perfectly clear about that. As for the question of the supply of tanks to Libya, Israel or any other country, we do not normally comment on particular deliveries.

Bearing in mind that Libya has entered into an alliance with the United Arab Republic, can the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that any supplies of arms to Libya will be controlled so that they cannot be used against a neighbouring State, namely, Israel?

This is exactly the sort of consideration which we shall have in mind when dealing with any proposals about the supply of tanks.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will now publish a White Paper on the effect on the constitutional position of the British Parliament of Great Britain's accession to the Treaty of Rome.

No, Sir. Consideration was given to this in the White Paper "Legal and Constitutional Implications of United Kingdom Membership of the European Communities" (Cmnd. 3301) published in May 1967.

That White Paper is now out of date and incomplete. Will my right hon. and learned Friend reconsider this and publish a list of all the Acts that require amendment and Statutes which must be introduced in the unlikely event of Britain entering the Common Market? What would be the alterations in parliamentary machinery for this purpose?

At this stage of our negotiations the information given in the White Paper is adequate. No doubt at a later stage it may be necessary to provide more.

Is the Minister aware that two minutes ago I was refused a Question by the Table on the ground that it referred to what the previous Administration had done and that I cannot ask the present Government to be responsible for what the previous Administration did? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] How can the Government try to fall back on the decision taken in 1967, as the House of Commons has never had an opportunity of passing any opinion on the matter?

As far as I can recall, there were debates in the last Parliament which were very helpful.

Since my right hon. and learned Friend referred specifically, in his Answer to my right hon. Friend's Question, to the White Paper of 1967, can he say why he gave instructions for the transfer of my Question on that White Paper to the Attorney-General? Is it because this is such a hot potato that every Minister wants to pass it on to another?

I do not quite know in which circumstances my right hon. and learned Friend's Question was transferred. As he will appreciate, the Attorney-General is responsible to this House for questions relating to constitutional matters.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress of negotiations to join the European Economic Community.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he is satisfied with the progress to date of negotiations to join the European Economic Community; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement about the progress of negotiations for Great Britain to join the European Economic Community.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the present state of the negotiations for Great Britain to join the European Economic Community.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the latest position in the Common Market negotiations.

At present I have nothing to add to what I told the House on 25th November. I would hope, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, and with that of the House, to make a further statement on the progress of the negotiations after the next Ministerial meetings which take place tomorrow. I am satisfied that all parties are making efforts to see that the negotiations are concluded as soon as possible.—[Vol. 807, c. 431.]

Can my right hon. and learned Friend make any statement on progress which may have been made on the time factors for Britain's entry into the Common Market, if that is to take place? We have heard mention of five and seven years.

Not at this stage.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend accept that there is absolutely no connection between the decision taken in the House last week on the question of British Summer Time and Greenwich Mean Time and the question of applying to join the Common Market?

Yes. I assure my hon. Friend that I was entirely in favour of the Motion which was carried by such a large majority last week.

While wishing my right hon. and learned Friend well in tomorrow's meeting, may I ask him whether he agrees that if we were already in the Common Market it would be a good deal easier for Europe to exert influence on the United States against restrictive trade measures?

I am sure that that would be so. The Community has made representations to the United States on this subject. I have no doubt that an enlarged Community would adopt outward-looking and liberal policies.

May I remind my right hon. and learned Friend of the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 5th May that enlargement of the Community should not take place without the wholehearted consent of the British people? In view of the latest opinion poll, which shows that only 16 per cent. of the people are in favour of Britain applying to join the Common Market, how do the Government propose to obtain the wholehearted consent of the British people to this country joining the Common Market?

If the outcome of the negotiations is, in the Government's view, successful, they will have to put the position to Parliament.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman, when making statements, take every appropriate opportunity to remind the public that besides the civil servants in Brussels there are the Council of Ministers and a potentially important democratic institution in the European Parliament in Strasbourg?

That is certainly so.

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman is conducting the negotiations, can he say whether the Government support the proposals for currency union and rigidly fixed exchange rates which the Community has taken as its objective?

There are later Questions on the Order Paper on that subject. I take exactly the same view as that taken by the previous Administration.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what dates have been fixed for the Ministerial meetings between Great Britain and the European Economic Community between now and the end of 1970.

There will be one further ministerial meeting this year, on 8th December, and a meeting at the level of Deputies on 18th December.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a Ministerial broadcast on television about the progress of the negotiations for Great Britain to enter the European Economic Community.

I have no plans to do so at present.

In view of the apparent state of public opinion on this matter, does not the right hon. and learned Gentleman think that the time has come for the Government to give more of a lead? Is it not very odd that, on the one hand, the negotiations should be going very well, but, on the other hand—[Laughter.] Hon. Members may laugh, but some of us returned at the end of last week from Brussels where we spoke to people in the Commission. This is the impression which we got.

Order. The hon. Gentleman must not interrupt himself.

I did not make the first interruption, Mr. Speaker.

I do not accept that criticism of my colleagues. A great deal of information is being presented on all aspects of the negotiations. One difficulty is that there are people who do not care what may be the result of the negotiations, but those of us who are concerned that they should be successful must, to some extent, await their outcome and deal with matters as they arise.

As the level of the financial contribution to be made by Her Majesty's Government in the event of our joining the Common Market is probably the most critical single issue, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman propose to explain the Government's view on this matter to the Ministerial meeting this week?

I do not think that I can anticipate what I shall say tomorrow or what will be the outcome of the discussions. I shall certainly make a statement to the House thereafter.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend recall from his own forensic experience that some cases are so weak that even the most persuasive and skilled advocacy cannot make them appear other than they are? Is that perhaps the very proper and prudent reason underlying my right hon. and learned Friend's refusal to go on television, as suggested in the Question?

Although I have frequently heard my right hon. and learned Friend do exactly that, I can assure him that that is not so in this case.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman seen the report by Peterborough in the Daily Telegraph this morning that he will be warmly welcomed in Brussels tomorrow because of the Government's introduction of their wretched Industrial Relations Bill? If he makes a Ministerial broadcast, will he tell our associates in Western Europe that they must not interfere in British affairs?

I am quite sure that there will be no interference by the Community in the passage of the Government's Industrial Relations Bill.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with Commonwealth countries on the effect on their trade with Great Britain of the Common External Tariff should Great Britain join the Common Market; and whether he will make a statement.

I have had discussions with a large number of Commonwealth countries on the effect on their trade if Britain joins the European Communities.

Surely the Chancellor of the Duchy can confirm that the trade of Commonwealth countries to Britain is still greater than it is with the whole of the Six put together? In view of the fact that they would suffer a double blow through the loss of Commonwealth preferences on top of the imposition of common external tariff, surely he has proposals himself to put to the European countries in order to safeguard vital Commonwealth interests?

Of course we have put proposals to the Community to safeguard vital Commonwealth interests. Of course Commonwealth trade is of great importance to this country. What we believe is that if negotiations can be concluded on satisfactory terms, a strong Britain within the enlarged Community will bring great trading benefits to the Commonwealth.

Would the Chancellor not agree that the acceptance of the common external tariff and its implications will mean that we shall lose customers outside this country, so that we should have a smaller market after entry than we have now?

Experience has not shown that to be necessarily the case. Commonwealth trade with the Community has increased very considerably in recent years.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Six on their proposals for an Economic and Monetary Union; and whether he will make a statement.

Economic and monetary union is not one of the subjects being discussed in the negotiations for Britain's entry into the European Communities. They are, of course, matters of general interest being discussed by the Six in the light of the Werner Report. Like the last Government, we have welcomed the moves which the Community has already made towards closer economic and monetary integration.

Surely the Chancellor of the Duchy must accept that that is an extraordinary and very unsatisfactory reply? It is no good at all saying, "We are doing the same as the last Government", when the last Government had no possibility of considering the Werner Report which was not even completed or published until October this year. Will he please make it plain to the House why he does not include this in the substance of the negotiations and why he will not make it clear how Britain stands on this crucial question of fixed exchange rates?

These are not matters for discussion in the negotiations. We may have a part to play in general discussions beforehand about monetary co-operation, and if the negotiations are successful and we are members, then certainly we shall have a great deal to say. But nothing will prejudice our decision. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that the Leader of the Opposition, when he was Prime Minister, on 10th February, 1970, had a great deal to say about this matter, and said, I think, that he thought that nothing but good could come from closer cooperation within an enlarged Community on financial matters; and that is all that is being proposed at this stage. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that he was a member of the Cabinet at that time. We are conducting negotiations on the very basis that his own Government put forward.

Having read the Werner Report, may I ask whether my right hon. and learned Friend agrees with the logic of it, and, in particular, does he accept the consequences of the economic and monetary reform of the union clearly set out in the Werner Report?

All I accept is that there is nothing to cause us concern in the first stage of the Werner Report calling for a measure of co-operation in these matters. The second stage would not arise as far as we are concerned till we were members of the Community. We would then express our views. The third stage is fairly far in the future and would require amendments of the Treaty of Rome. Certainly nothing could happen in regard to these matters which could be decided without our point of view being expressed.

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman give a clear answer? Do the Government favour or disfavour the proposed Federal decision centre which would rob Britain entirely of her national independence?

I do not accept in any way the premises on which that question is framed.

Is it not becoming clear that progress on the lines foreshadowed in the Werner Report is likely to be pretty cautious?

All the experience of the Community throughout its history is that it adopts a cautious and pragmatic approach on these matters. There is a good deal of monetary and economic cooperation at the present time, and it must be in our interest to see that it continues.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to visit Bonn for discussions with Herr Scheel about the British application for membership of the European Economic Community.

Neither I nor my right hon. Friend have any immediate plan to visit Bonn for discussions with Herr Scheel. I will, however, be meeting Herr Scheel at tomorrow's Ministerial meeting in Brussels.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that, whatever differences may exist between the major German political parties on the question of ostpolitik, there is a very wide measure of unanimity across all political opinion in Germany on the advantages of our application succeeding?

I am sure that that is so, I am sure that if the negotiations can succeed there will be mutual benefit to both countries and to the whole Community.

The Chancellor of the Duchy will have heard the Foreign Secretary express disapproval of our interference with other countries' policies. When he meets the German Foreign Minister will he apologise for the episode last Friday when members of his party, including a member of the Cabinet, indulged in criticism of the German Government's ostpolitik?

I have no knowledge of these matters.

Is the Chancellor of the Duchy aware that these negotiations are based on a false prospectus and that the British public is being deceived, in that the terms for which we are negotiating are not the terms and conditions which we shall have to accept within the E.E.C. in view of the Werner Report and the political union discussions now taking place?

The public would only be deceived if it accepted the sort of statement which the hon. Gentleman has just made.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further steps he will now take to keep the public informed of the progress of the Common Market negotiations.

My first duty is to keep the House and through it the Press and public informed on the negotiations. I also try to avail myself of as many opportunities as possible in making public speeches, and I accept a high proportion of the invitations I receive from radio and television channels in this country and abroad.

In his public speeches and television appearances will my right hon. and learned Friend continue to direct people's attention to the substantial and growing benefits to this country from membership of the Community, not only economic but political?

Yes, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the latest official estimate we have had of the increase in the cost of living consequent on joining the Community is now out of date and pessimistic? Is he aware that this is one of the many objections to joining the Common Market which is being tactfully dropped by those who oppose our joining, and will he therefore publish a White Paper setting out the new facts?

Certainly this is a developing process. There has been a great deal of exaggeration of the effect on the cost of living of our joining the Community, and not enough has been said about the increase in the standard of living that should result.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to visit the French Foreign Minister to discuss the enlargement of the European communities.

Neither I nor my right hon. Friend has any specific plans for further bilateral meetings with M. Schumann at this stage. I look forward to seeing him at tomorrow's Ministerial negotiating meeting in Brussels.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the French Government have found that their effective sovereignty has been in no way diminished by membership of E.E.C. and that, on the contrary, they have been able to exert an increasing influence in the world? Is this not the answer to the claim that to join the Common Market will reduce our influence?

This is certainly a fact. It is worth pointing out that, on the whole, the French, like other members of the Community, have exerted a greater influence acting in concert than they could have hoped to exert acting alone.

In any discussions which the Minister has with the French Foreign Secretary, will he make it clear that in his view the creation of a Europe-based reserve currency, which might be the ultimate outcome of the proposals in the Werner Report, would be greatly to the advantage of this country and of the world?

These are matters not directly arising in the negotiations, and the question is one which would be better put to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I agree with the hon. Gentleman in all these matters. We have a great interest in co-operating and finding appropriate solutions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many members of his Department are engaged whole-time and at what estimated annual cost on the Common Market negotiations.

There are 11 members of the Diplomatic Service engaged full-time in the negotiations. A further 11 officers in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and in Brussels provide supporting services for the Delegation which are almost full time. The best estimate I can give of the cost of this staff is approximately £145,000.

Can my right hon. and learned Friend say whether these people work in the Department called the European Integration Department? As the present Government are following on the previous Government's negotiations, and are therefore committed to no centralism and no supranationalism, as stated by the previous Prime Minister on 9th February, 1969, why are we trying to integrate Britain into Europe?

There is no particular significance in the title of this section of the Department, as I explained to my hon. Friend the Member for Holland with Boston (Mr. Body) the other day—none at all.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say, in addition, what is now the annual cost to public funds of giving financial help to organisations working for British membership of the Common Market? Has the amount increased or is it the same?

A number of Questions have been asked on the subject, but it does not arise out of this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will report to the House of Commons on the submissions made by Her Majesty's Government in the course of the negotiations for entry into the European Economic Community, before they are divulged to the Press.

The full texts of submissions made by Her Majesty's Government in the course of the negotiations with the European Communities are confidential. I hope, however, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, and with that of the House, to continue my practice of making statements to the House as soon as possible after each Ministerial negotiating meeting.

But is not my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the Press seem to be getting the information while the House is getting no details at all? Will he adopt the suggestion made by the right hon. Member for Woolwich, East (Mr. Mayhew) that he should publish a White Paper whenever he changes the economic assessment of his predecessors?

There must, I suppose, be some limit to the number of White Papers one can publish. I appreciate that a certain difficulty arises out of fairly detailed reports in the Press of what is going on in the course of negotiations. I can promise my right hon. Friend that I will do my best to ensure that the House is kept fully informed, and that the information given to the House will be the authoritative statement. I cannot negotiate on the basis of leaks of documents that have not been handed over to me.

While thanking the right hon. and learned Gentleman for the information he has already given to the House about a common fisheries policy, may I ask whether he can say in what form his statements will be made at a later date, and what prospects he may see about coming to some agreement on a separate protocol?

We have made our position clear about the fisheries agreement. We regretted the circumstances in which it was brought forward whilst negotiations were going on, but we have accepted that it was coincidental and that it applies only to the fishery policies of the Six, and we have reserved our position. I do not think that I can say any more at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will reconstitute the consultative committee between Government and representative bodies on entry into the Common Market; and if, in addition to reappointing the Cooperative Union, he will invite representation from other bodies serving consumers' interests like the Consumer's Association.

No, Sir. I consider that present channels of consultation with outside representative bodies are adequate.

Did it just fade away or was it wound up? Were its members ever thanked for their services? Has it disappeared without trace? As the right hon. and learned Gentleman is not prepared to consult the rest of the country in any other way, will he reestablish this body so that at least he can receive advice from quarters other than those from which he is receiving it at the moment?

It is true that this body disappeared almost without trace. It was set up and first met in December, 1966. It had four meetings between December, 1966, and May, 1967. It was set up under the auspices of the Department of Economic Affairs. Perhaps the right hon. Member for Stepney (Mr. Shore), who was then responsible for these negotiations, can help the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the supply of maritime arms to South Africa.

The Government will make a statement at the appropriate time when a decision has been reached.

As the matter has been under consideration for six months, can my right hon. Friend say whether the decision will be announced at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference?

No. We shall announce the decision in our own time. I should not like at this moment to forecast when that will be.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that we hope that the Government's "own time" never arrives and that we shall hear no more of this foolishness?

Various people in the House hope for various things.

What were the effects of the representations made to the Government by British commercial interests, particularly the oil companies, about the consequences for our investments in black Africa in respect of this proposed decision?

We have a very large trade with black Africa and with South Africa, and we have very large investments in the latter. I should need notice of the hon. Gentleman's question to quantify the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the future status of Gibraltar.

Her Majesty's Government have no plans to alter the status of Gibraltar which is defined in the preamble to the Gibraltar Constitution Order in Council of May, 1969.

Can my right hon. Friend say what will happen to Gibraltar should Britain join the European Economic Community? Can he assure us that the right of entry which Gibraltarians enjoy today will be safeguarded in the pending immigration legislation?

That is a matter of which my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will take note. But at present Gibraltar would come under Article 227(4) of the Treaty, which would, I think, be in accordance with the wishes of the people of Gibraltar.

What consideration has been given to the idea put forward by the Gibraltarians that Gibraltar should be represented in this House?

I do not think that that matter has been taken any further. The previous Administration gave their views on it. We have nothing to add to what was said.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that if Gibraltar is covered by Article 227(4), which deals with full membership of the European Economic Community, it will involve obligations of free passage for their workers between that country and other countries in association with the E.E.C.?

There are various aspects of this matter. I cannot anticipate the discussions. This is one aspect which will have to be borne in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the terms of compensation payable to dependent relatives of officials of his Department who lose their lives as a result of terrorist activities; and if he will make a statement.

Widows of members of the Diplomatic Service who lose their lives in these circumstances would receive, in addition to the normal death gratuity and widow's pension, a special allowance under the Injury Warrant, 1965.

I am sure that we all agree with what the right hon. Gentleman says about the safe deliverance of Mr. Cross. Will he bear in mind that Government representatives of this country in foreign parts are entitled not only to decent terms of compensation but to adequate security? Will he agree that the policy on Africa being pursued by the Government is more likely to put our representatives at risk than to keep them in safety?

No. I do not think that I would agree with that but would devote myself to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. We are very concerned about the security of our diplomatic representatives in all circumstances in any country, and we will do all we can about it and study with great care the compensation which they would get in cases of accident or injury.

Would the Foreign Secretary convey to the Government of Canada the thanks and admiration of this House for the way they have behaved?

We have conveyed to them the thanks of Her Majesty's Government here and I think the House would wish the House's thanks to be conveyed, too.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he intends to pay an official visit to Fiji.

I have no plans for such a visit at this time.

Would the Foreign Secretary start considering plans to visit Fiji? Is he not aware that the people of that newly independent State are anxious to have a clear statement from the Government here about the future of the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement?

I was in Fiji in March, but I am always willing to go back again—very happy to do so; it is a lovely place to be. Of course we bear very strongly in mind the dependence of the Fijian economy on sugar.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the latest developments in contacts between Her Majesty's Government and the illegal Rhodesian régime.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave to a Question from my hon. Friend the Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) on 16th November.—[Vol. 806, c. 302.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman not agree, in view of the latest news from Rhodesia of still further entrenchment of racialism in the policy of the Government there, that we can have no confidence that conditions contained in the five principles would be observed once independence had been recognised? Would he not, therefore, reconsider the ill-timed decision of the Government here to reopen negotiations with the régime?

No. I would have thought that, in a way, it made it more urgent that we should see whether there is a satisfactory settlement which can be reached within the five principles.

Would not my right hon. Friend accept the fact that most people on this side of the House welcome what he is doing and wish him every success?

Would not the right hon. Gentleman accept that if there is to be any chance whatever of success in this doubtful exercise it will depend on the Government's making it quite clear that, failing a settlement, sanctions will continue, and that the decision of the Rhodesian Government to introduce new apartheid-type legislation after the House of Commons debate casts grave doubt on the wisdom of the Government's policy in this respect?

We debated this policy a very short time ago and during that debate we discussed the sanctions question. I have nothing to add to what I said then.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he has for an official visit to South and Central America.

Whilst I would naturally hope to visit Latin America, I have no plans to do so at present.

Will not the Foreign Secretary see whether he can arrange for one of his senior colleagues to pay a visit in view of the great commercial and political success of previous visits?

Yes, I hope that many visits can be arranged. The Chancellor of the Duchy has just come back from Mexico, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry visited the Argentine last month and Princess Alexandra opened the British Industrial Exhibition. I hope that this pattern of visits can continue.

If the right hon. Gentleman does visit South America, will he regard the observance of international obligations relating to minority rights and freedom of expression as legitimate subjects for discussion with Governments there, particularly when he visits Brazil?

As long as the hon. Gentleman does not ask me to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has received representations from the United States of America on the question of the imposition of levies by the United Kingdom on grain imports; and whether he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. As large grain producers, the United States are naturally concerned about the possible effect that our cereals proposals could have on them. We are engaged in consultations with the United States Government and with other Governments who are parties to the Five Power Agreement relating to cereals.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that a sympathetic attitude will be taken towards these representations, since the imposition of levies, combined with trade protection and the predatory dumping of the Common Market, is creating an international climate of protection which is against this country's interests?

No, I could not give the undertaking for which the hon. Gentleman asks. All we are doing here is changing over the cost of support to this country from the taxpayer to the consumer. The effect on American or other suppliers can easily be exaggerated.

Does not the Minister agree that the Government will take the steps which are in the best interests of this country and British farmers?

Yes, Sir.

Will the Minister bear in mind that there is a case for imposing levies on feed grains, which we can grow ourselves, but not such a good case for imposing levies on hard wheat, which would cause bread prices to rise considerably? Will he see that there is a differential?

I am interested in the point which my hon. Friend has put forward. I think that the commercial difference in price is sufficient to distinguish between the two.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Comonwealth Affairs if he is satisfied with the working conditions of the staff of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. I am not satisfied. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Construc- tion is at present considering what steps can be taken, pending the construction of a new Foreign and Commonwealth Office, to improve conditions in the old building.

I welcome what my right hon. Friend said, but will he confirm that his Department is accommodated in no fewer than 13 separate buildings and urge his right hon. Friend to remedy that situation?

Yes, these will be matters for discussion between my right hon. Friend and myself.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the West German Foreign Minister about the question of recognising, the German Democratic Republic.

I have discussed with Herr Scheel his Government's eastern policies, including their efforts to achieve a modus vivendi with East Germany. Details of these discussions are confidential.

Is it not high time that the right hon. Gentleman came off the fence and accepted that the normalisation of relations between West and East Germany would benefit us as much as West Germany? As was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley), a party of the right hon. Gentleman's parliamentary colleagues in Bonn was recently subjected to what The Times called a vitriolic outburst against Herr Brandt's ostpolitik. In view of that and the deplorable attack of the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Duncan Sandys) in opposing the recognition of the Oder-Neisse line and the treaty which Herr Brandt is signing in Moscow today, will the right hon. Gentleman take this opportunity to repudiate what his right hon. Friend said and make it clear that the Government do not support the C.D.U?

I am quite clear that the Government have supported Herr Brandt in his ostpolitik policy. We think that he has handled the matter with very considerable skill. When the hon. Lady speaks about normalisation between East and West Germany, that is exactly what Willy Brandt is trying to do, but the East German Government have not so far responded.

Will my right hon. Friend make it clear to the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Renee Short) that there can be no normalisation of relations with East Germany as long as the Berlin Wall is in position?

There are many matters that should be discussed between the West German and East German Governments, and the West German Government are trying to do just this. At the North Atlantic Council meeting last week everyone was agreed that there must be visible progress on Berlin before we could begin to talk about normalisation.

In general I welcome the Answers which the Foreign Secretary has given, but does he not agree that that still leaves Friday's incident unresolved? Will he take this opportunity of making clear that what his colleagues, including a Cabinet Minister, said or were a party to in Germany on Friday does not represent the views of Her Majesty's Government?

I must make myself more aware of what my right hon. Friend said. On the other hand, I can only answer for Her Majesty's Government, and Her Majesty's Government's view is as I have described it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he has made since his appointment to enable a European Security Conference to take place.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he is satisfied that the necessary conditions have now been met for the convening of a European Security Conference; and if he will make a statement.

As I told the House on 20th July, I would welcome a well-prepared and businesslike meeting to deal with matters of real substance. This and related questions were fully discussed at the meeting of the North Atlantic Council which I attended in Brussels on 3rd and 4th December. With permission, I will circulate the Communiqué of this meeting in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that the Foreign Office is not up to its old tricks and trying to raise obstacles when progress in East-West relations appears to be good? Will he also bear in mind that it is many years since the Warsaw Powers made proposals for a security conference? At a time when N.A.T.O. is putting pressure on us to spend more on defence in Europe, does not the Foreign Secretary think that it is high time we made an agreement with the Warsaw Pact countries so that we could reduce our defence expenditure?

We do not see any point at this moment in creating new machinery to try to normalise conditions when the present machinery could be used by the Soviet Union if it had the will.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that until the Soviet Union has shown some willingness for peaceful co-existence, both over Berlin and over the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks with the West, we must be chary of making any one-sided concessions?

Yes, that is what I tried to say but my hon. Friend has said it better.

Does the Foreign Secretary remember that a month ago he told the House that this conference needed to be carefully prepared? Last week, however, he changed his ground and said at Brussels that the time was not ripe. Does not this suggest that the Foreign Secretary is continually finding excuses for not holding such a conference?

No, Sir. I have been totally consistent. If we are to have a conference it must be properly prepared. It is no use beginning the preparation unless the Soviet Union shows itself willing to achieve some easing of tension in Berlin.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the necessary climate for such talks is adversely affected by reports of increased espionage, especially by Russia? In view of the report this morning in the Daily Mail that three Russian diplomats, or members of a trade delegation, have been expelled from this country, can he say whether that is affecting the situation, and also whether the report is correct?

That would not affect the calling of any preparations for a security conference. We are constantly having to deal with this aspect of Soviet policy, which I deeply deplore, but it is a separate matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the relations in Central Europe between the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the Warsaw Pact, following the Federal German Government's talks with Poland.

We welcome the initialling of the Polish-German Treaty. N.A.T.O. Ministers' position on questions affecting relations between East and West in Europe is set out in the communiqué issued after the meeting of the North Atlantic Council which I attended in Brussels last week. I am circulating the text in the OFFICIAL REPORT in reply to Question No. 26.

Will my right hon. Friend let the Federal German Government know that we welcome this improvement in relations between the Federal Government and our Polish friends, on whose behalf we entered the war in 1939?

Yes, and we are glad to see the matter of the OderNeisse line settled between the Poles and the Germans.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most thoughtful people in this country welcome the peaceful settlement of the problem of the frontier between Germany and Poland, and that since most thoughtful people in this country are friendly to Poland, we realise that this affects us and also European peace?

Yes, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take this opportunity to make it clear that he does not support the views of his colleagues, expressed in the Western European Union Assembly, which sought to water down the resolution welcoming the ostpolitik of Herr Brandt?

No, Sir. I do not think that that is necessary. Again, I can only repeat—and I think that the House feels this, too—that so far the ostpolitik has been successful as far as it has been conducted by the West German Government. We now want a response from the other side.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response the Union of Soviet Social Republics has made to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation proposals for mutual and balanced force reductions in Central Europe.

The Warsaw Pact countries have not responded directly to N.A.T.O.'s proposals; but at the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Brussels last week N.A.T.O. Ministers renewed their invitation to interested States to hold exploratory talks on the subject.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether there has been any indication that the U.S.S.R. are willing to get down to discussing the substantive problems, which is necessary before this conference can be a success?

That remains to be seen: the invitation is open.

But is it not the case that the Warsaw Powers indicated in June for the very first time that they were prepared to discuss mutual force reductions either at or after a possible European security conference, and should not the House at least welcome this progress, limited though it is, in the position of the Soviet Union?

Yes, Sir. I am not sure how far they have gone back on what they originally said. They now seem to be limiting any discussion to the reduction of foreign forces on the territory of European States, and are not willing now that this should be discussed in a security conference. But this has further to be explored. I think that the Russians feel that this is not the right forum.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he will submit to the United Nations concerning guarantees for any settlement in the Middle East.

We have no immediate plans to put forward proposals on the subject. This is one of the matters which has been the subject of discussion in the Four-Power talks in New York.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, but does not he agree that effective guarantees are an essential key to any settlement in the Middle East and that on this occasion we must not repeat the mistake made in 1956 by denying teeth to any military presence, as it was previously denied as a result of the British and French veto in 1956, and that it is therefore necessary for the Security Council to support any military presence with its authority; if one or two super-Powers are hesitant about becoming involved directly in guaranteeing a settlement, has the right hon. Gentleman considered the possibility of a European initiative?

This is one of the most sensitive issues in the whole problem of the Middle East. There are others, but this is one of tremendous importance. We have obviously had discussions with our colleagues and others to see whether we can find ways and means of providing satisfactory guarantees. We certainly have thoughts in relation to this, but I do not think that it would help if I were to set them out this afternoon.

Will the Minister exercise his influence in trying to bring about the maximum degree of European participation in any settlement in the Middle East?

Yes, Sir. It would obviously be necessary to have European participation. That will be one aspect that we shall bear in mind.

The Minister's replies have been encouraging, but can he say specifically that there is no objection in principle to a French or British contribution to a United Nations force on Israel's old frontiers, if and when she withdraws to them?

We should not be opposed to providing a contingent to such a force. The main thing is to obtain agreement among the parties concerned on the sort of force that would give them an adequate feeling of security.

Will my right hon. Friend try to make the point that if such a force is established it will not succeed if, as in the case of the last one, it is at the behest of a dictator?

Without commenting on what happened before, I would say that the best thing, if this were to be done under United Nations auspices, would be to make it subject to a Security Council resolution, which would mean that any of the major parties concerned could veto any suggestion of a withdrawal.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what criteria govern the lowering to half-mast of the Union Jack over United Kingdom diplomatic missions in the capitals of foreign countries on the occasion of the funeral of a foreign head of state or head of government.

The flying of flags at half-mast is a matter for The Queen's Pleasure, and appropriate instructions to do so are given under Command of Her Majesty in each case as it arises.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain, therefore, why it was decided that the Union Jack should be lowered to half-mast in Jerusalem on the day of President Nasser's funeral? Would he not agree that although President Nasser's death was greeted with widespread regret in this country, it inevitably aroused more mixed feelings in Israel; and that this action was an act of insensitivity on a par with the Foreign Secretary's speech at Harrogate?

No, Sir. I would not accept it as insensitivity. Her Majesty's local representative must have discretion in regard to local usage, and in this case the Consul-General flew the flag at half-mast because he judged that not to do so would give offence to a large proportion of the population, if not to all.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If this is a question of the Prerogative, should the Question have been asked?

Order. I understood that the Minister accepted responsibility by answering.