asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on his talks with other Foreign Ministers at the summit conference.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about his talks with other Foreign Ministers at the recent summit conference of members of the European Economic Community and applicant countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his talks with other Foreign Ministers at the summit meeting of the Common Market countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his discussions with Foreign Ministers at the Common Market summit meeting.

During the European Summit Conference last week I naturally discussed a number of matters with my colleagues from other participating countries. But the conference was essentially a meeting of Heads of State and Government. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will, with permission, be making a statement after Questions.

While I appreciate the difficulty that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in, can he perhaps spell out for the benefit of the House and the country something more of what is meant by the "European union" to which we have been committed by the Community?

This is something which has to be worked out in each sphere of the Community's activity over the years. Nobody was anxious at the conference to use labels like "confederation" or "federation" and therefore "union" is a word which will gradually become defined over the years.

rose—

Order. I would remind hon. Members that we have heard that the Prime Minister is to make a statement. Those who ask Questions now will be prejudicing their chances later on.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this conference was remarkable for how much was achieved and how many firm dates there are in the communiqué for the proposals agreed upon? Is he also aware that this has demonstrated that the nine members can reach agreement on progressive and bold policies without over-riding the interests of any of the members?

This is a feature of the partnership and the process of setting dates by which certain objectives should be achieved. It has been used successfully by the Six and I was glad to see it, in particular, in relation to the regional policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his official visit to China.

I shall be visiting China, at the invitation of the Chinese Foreign Minister, from 29th October to 2nd November. I look forward to discussing with him and his colleagues a wide range of subjects of bilateral and international concern.

Against the welcome background of the number of incoming delegations such as those from the Chinese motor industry and the science delegation which was recently here—clearly, there will be increasing contact—could the right hon. Gentleman, when he is in Peking, raise the issue of BOAC entry to China and also, indeed, any incoming visits from the Chinese State airline to London?

Yes, Sir. I have already taken this possibility up in advance with the Government of China and I shall be following it up, as the hon. Gentleman requests, when I go there.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement concerning discussions which he has had with members and proposed members of the European Economic Community regarding policies in the Middle East.

The members of the enlarged Community attach great importance to an early political settlement of the Arab/Israel dispute and are keeping the situation in the Middle East under careful review.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree, however, that there has been a most unfortunate and almost unprecedented coincidence of view between Her Majesty's Government and the French Government very recently over the Middle East? Does he not agree that for years France has adopted a most hostile and partisan attitude towards Israel? Does he not also agree that this coincidence of view was reflected most recently at the United Nations when the Government refused to support an American resolution which condemned the terrorist outrage at Munich and the Arab Governments which aided and abetted that outrage yet at the same time condemned Israel for embarking on a policy of retaliation? Is this not a matter which reflects a very serious alignment between the French and British Governments?

No, Sir, I could not accept that interpretation. The Governments of France and Britain, as well as the other members of the Commuity, are very anxious to see a fair settlement of this dispute. I am equally conscious that no Government or combination of Governments can impose a settlement on either the Israelis or the Arabs. As for what the hon. Gentleman says about our attitude towards terrorism, we made it quite clear at once and have done so constantly that we are opposed to these terrorist activities. We simply do not think that retaliatory action on the scale used by Israel helps an ultimate answer to this problem.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Security Council Resolution No. 242 of November, 1967, still offers the best chance of a reasonable and fair settlement in that part of the world? Will he confirm that his admirable speech at Harrogate on 31st October 1970, is still very much the policy of Her Majesty's Government?

Yes, Sir; and United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 242 is acceptable both to ourselves and to the French. I have said that no settlement can be imposed from outside, but the outline of the settlement I made in my speech at Harrogate two years ago is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

On the question of discussions with the EEC, since the right hon. Gentleman has a remit to produce a common foreign policy by 30th June next—God help him!—can he say whether the Middle East is included in this remit or whether, at France's request, that subject will be excluded from any common foreign policy?

All the members of the European partnership are willing to try to see whether we can help towards a settlement in the Middle East. Therefore, it is a very good thing that we should meet from time to time to clear our own views. It remains to be seen whether we can put forward a settlement acceptable to both parties.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the position of Asians with British passport resident in East Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Ugandan Government to dissuade them from expelling Asians with British passports from Uganda.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement concerning discussions which he has had with President Amin concerning the position of United Kingdom passport holders in Uganda.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Ugandan Government to secure a longer period of notice of intention to deport Asians with British passports.

Despite our representations, the Ugandan Government have refused to rescind the decision to expel the Asians from Uganda or to extend the deadline of three months by which they must leave. They have, however, given assurances to the Secretary-General of the United Nations that Asians remaining after the deadline will not be maltreated.

Has any estimate been made of the assets which Ugandan Asian immigrants have been prevented from bringing out of that country, and does my right hon. Friend think that there is any reasonable chance of their obtaining compensation? Can he report on any progress in discussions with the United Nations about the position of stateless Ugandans?

That supplementary question goes slightly wider than the original Question. Nevertheless, I will answer my hon. Friend by saying that we have made representations about assets and again General Amin has told the United Nations Secretary-General that he does not intend to confiscate the property of the Asians. It still remains to be seen what he will do in terms of compensation. On the question of stateless Ugandan Asians, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, whom we have been actively stimulating to do his best, has got a good long way in his discussions with the Ugandan Government about the treatment of stateless refugees. Our concern has been to get them out of Uganda safely.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the undertaking given to the United Nations about good treatment will be fulfilled? Is it possible for him to take steps to try to ensure that this is the case?

In view of recent history in Uganda, I cannot say that pledges will be carried out. They have been solemnly given to the United Nations Secretary-General, and again to the President of Liberia and to the President of Zaire. If these pledges are not kept, I must reserve every right to use all the machinery of the United Nations.

For how many persons have entry certificates been issued to date?

I think in the region of 20,000.

You are wrong.

Perhaps I can confirm it to my right hon. Friend. I have not the latest figure with me.

It is over 25,000.

Has the Foreign Secretary given consideration to the convening of a Commonwealth meeting in order to consider what useful place, if any, Uganda has in the Commonweath in future?

There is a later Question on that subject.

Have we been able to make any assessment of the assets of the Asians who have left Uganda?

The Asians who are in a position to do so have given to our High Commissioner in Kampala an assessment of their assets. Therefore, these are recorded in the High Commission.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great public unease in the country that hundreds of thousands of Asians and other races with British passports, or possibly stateless persons, may claim the right to come to this country? Is there any comfort at all which Her Majesty's Government can give to people of this country on this matter which so vitally affects them and the future of their children?

There is a Question on this matter later on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations or complaints have been made to him about the manner, speed and efficiency with which the British High Commission in Kampala is processing applications to enter the United Kingdom by British passport-holders previously resident in Uganda.

I have received a very small number of complaints and representations, including one from the hon. Gentleman. However, I am fully satisfied that the High Commission faced with very difficult circumstances has been working hard and efficiently to carry out its tasks before the deadline.

While I appreciate that the staff of the High Commission are certainly working under extremely difficult circumstances, and that there has been a great deal of progress since my Question was tabled, will the right hon. Gentleman nevertheless take note that a considerable body of opinion would wish the benefit of any doubt to be given to those who are applying for entry and that a considerable number of people in this country would not wish any of the Asians to be left to the tender mercies of General Amin after the deadline through any bureaucratic procedures on the part of the British Government?

We shall not be bureaucratic in this matter, but there must be a limit to the number of Asians we can take, and we cannot take stateless Asians. But I have to resist the implication that the High Commission had not been efficient. What it has done in the time available is almost miraculous. We now look like getting all the Asians with British passports out before the deadline of 8th November. I deplore an anonymous memorandum dated 6th October which was circulated to a number of Members of Parliament and which had no basis of accuracy at all.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has for discussions with the Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia, Mr. Bohuslav Chnoupek.

I met Mr. Chnoupek in New York. There are no plans at present for a further meeting.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that his answer will be very welcome? Should there be a subsequent meeting with the Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia, I hope he will convey the alarm which exists in this country about the recent series of political trials in that country, although I appreciate that we have no standing in this matter. Will he also convey to the Czech Foreign Minister when they next meet the feelings expressed in the early day Motion No. 434 —Political Trials in Czechoslovakia—which stands in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone (Mr. John Mendelson)?

As I have said, I saw the Czech Foreign Minister in New York and there would be no point in our having a meeting at present. The timing of any meeting would be within my own control.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Smith régime about the withdrawal of passports from Bishop Muzorewa and the Reverend Canaan Banana.

None, Sir. As I have made clear on many occasions, we have no control over developments inside Rhodesia, and cannot bring about the return of the Rhodesian passports in this case.

Does not the Foreign Secretary agree that there is a great difference between the way in which Africans are treated in Rhodesia and the way in which Rhodesians are treated in this country? Is it not time he took vigorous action to protect the rights of Africans in Rhodesia? Will he make clear that the sporting emissaries of the Smith regime, such as the present touring hockey team, are not welcome here, and will he act vigorously to stop such people coming to Britain?

The hon. Gentleman's appeal to me would be more convincing if his Government had been able to do anything in similar circumstances. We cannot bring about the return of Rhodesian passports and that is what the Question is about.

I appreciate that there is a limit on what the Foreign Secretary can do, but he can speak. Is it not the case that there will be no adequate settlement in Rhodesia unless people like those mentioned in the Question are able to express their views and put the views of the millions they represent? Cannot the right hon. Gentleman express to the Rhodesian Government the British Government's concern that leaders of this sort, who have proved their worth, should be denied passports?

Mr. Smith is well aware that our feeling is that leaders of African opinion must be able to put their views to others and that there ought to be a settlement which has the assent of those leaders of African opinion. But passports are an internal matter for Rhodesia on which I cannot influence Mr. Smith.

Is my right hon Friend aware that the actions of Mr. Smith's Government in Rhodesia contrast very favourably with the actions of President Amin in Uganda?

Rubbish.

If there are ever again negotiations for a settlement with the Rhodesian régime, will the Foreign Secretary ensure that it is an essential condition that human rights there, such as the freeing of political prisoners and freedom of movement, will be restored?

If the hon. and learned Gentleman had read the proposed settlement I made with Mr. Smith in November, he would have seen that part of it was a declaration of human rights. I am afraid that will be absent so long as there is no settlement.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs why Her Majesty's Government decided to abstain in the Security Council vote upon the resolution reaffirming its decision to use mandatory sanctions against Southern Rhodesia submitted by Guinea, Somalia and Sudan; why a further resolution was rejected with the United Kingdom casting the only negative vote and thus exercising the veto; and if he will make a statement.

The United Kingdom representative abstained on Security Council Resolution 320 since it did not contain any proposals likely to help the United Nations in supervising the implementation of existing sanctions. The further draft resolution and two of its paragraphs which were put to the vote separately were vetoed because they called for no independence before majority African rule and contained unacceptable conditions about how Her Majesty's Government should handle the Fifth Principle.

Is it not shameful that in the forum of the world with the world's eyes upon Her Majesty's Government we seem to be placating and appeasing the rebel Mr. Smith? Will the right hon. Gentleman take much firmer action, especially when the honour of Britain is at stake, over such issues at the United Nations and take steps to step up sanctions and to bring the maximum amount of pressure to get this rebellion stopped?

When I was at the United Nations I did not find in relation to our Rhodesian policy any question of the United Nations members questioning the honour of the British policy. On the contrary, I think that most of them expected us not to accept the Pearce Report. When we did, they were surprised and, I think, thought that our course of action was honourable. I have to point out in the United Nations from time to time that the only thing we are trying to do is to get Rhodesia back into the comity of nations in an honourable way and to give it independence so that it can take part in international affairs again in an honourable way. That is not always understood in that assembly.

When discussing mandatory sanctions, has the United Nations ever deliberated which is the more worthy of having mandatory sanctions imposed against it—a country like Uganda which expels citizens who wish to stay there or a country like Russia which retains those who wish to get out?

I doubt whether the United Nations would make those rather nice distinctions.

Are not large-scale violations of sanctions being perpetrated by British firms through South Africa? Has the Foreign Secretary given no consideration to the tightening of sanctions? Has he no further action in mind to discriminate against firms, particularly British firms, which are still in Rhodesia?

If the hon. Gentleman has any evidence of breaches which he can place before me, I will consider it. If anybody has any evidence that a firm, British or any other nationality, is breaking sanctions, it is reported to the United Nations and from that moment on it is for the United Nations to take action.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on European and other international action against hijacking and terrorism.

We are actively discussing in the International Civil Aviation Organisation—ICAO—a convention on sanctions against States which fail to deal adequately with hijackers and similar criminals within their jurisdiction.

As surrender to blackmail only invites more, will Her Majesty's Government seek to sustain our Turkish allies and get the support of other Government in doing that in their present agonising decision?

I greatly deplore the action of those who have posed this question to the Turkish Government. I do not think there is anything that we can usefully do with regard to it. We must seek to get international agreement so that those who indulge in these outrages shall know that there is no safe haven for them anywhere in the world. This is the purpose of the discussions that we are having, and this is what I hope we shall help to bring to a conclusion.

My right hon. Friend says that the matter is being actively pursued at the ICAO convention. Is it not over a month since the proposals of the four countries were tabled there? Cannot my right hon. Friend say with more precision what results have flowed from that consideration in the very urgent state of this matter?

My right hon. and learned Friend has a later Question on the Order Paper on this specific point and I propose to answer it. At this stage I say only that it is our desire to hurry things up. The proposals were those of a sub-committee, and these have to be endorsed by the full body.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Common. wealth Affairs what is the present position as to the consideration by the Convention of the International Civil Aviation Organisation of the joint proposals from Great Britain, the United States of America, Canada and the Netherlands in regard to the control of hijacking and other act of terrorism and sabotage in respect of aircraft.

The Legal Sub-Committee of the International Civil Aviation Organisation, which met in Washington last month, has now reported to the International Civil Aviation Organisation Council. We are pressing for the immediate circulation of the report to member States, and for the convening as a matter of urgency of a meeting at which all member States may consider it with a view to concluding an international agreement.

As our representative found it necessary to block the initial proposals of the United States and Canada, does not there now perhaps rest on us a special duty to see that these new joint proposals are implemented as soon as possible, and does my right hon. Friend think that speedy progress can be made towards a practical and successful outcome?

Our desire is to have a fully effective agreement as soon as possible. We support, with the amendments which we proposed and which have been accepted, the proposals which came originally from the United States. We want to make them fully effective and we believe that our amendements work towards that end. As I indicated in my original answer, we are pressing for an early meeting. What we want is full support for these revised proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he hopes to meet the Foreign Minister of the Irish Republic.

Dr. Hillery and I were both at the summit meeting in Paris on 18th and 19th October. I have no plans for a formal meeting with the Foreign Minister at the moment. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister took the opportunity of the Paris meeting to talk with Mr. Lynch.

Can we have more details of the outcome of the talks with Mr. Lynch? In particular, because of the incursions into the six counties from the Republic and now from the six counties into the Republic, is there not a more urgent need for the Governments of both countries—the Irish Government and the British Government—to sit down and hammer out a policy for dealing with the dreadful things that are happening in Northern Ireland?

Yes, Sir I agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is so. We have repeatedly told Mr. Lynch how important it is that the incursions from the Irish Republic should be controlled by the Government of Ireland. Mr. Lynch can he in no doubt about that matter. My right hon. Friend is always willing to meet the Irish Prime Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his latest estimate of the potential number of United Kingdom passport holders in former British territories, other than Uganda.

Reliable figures are impossible to obtain, but the best estimate we can make on the information available is 255,000. I will, with permission, circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Although this obviously excludes Hong Kong, which is still a British territory, and although none of us would wish to foresee another crisis along the lines of the Ugandan Asian crisis, will my right hon. Friend undertake to discuss the question of British passports, which are increasingly anachronistic, with the United Nations and with the Commonwealth, because one can never be exactly sure that such a contingency will not arise again?

I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion. We have very orderly arrangements with Tanzania and Kenya and we have reason to believe that the Governments of those countries wish to maintain those. I hope that there will be no danger of a repetition in the immediate future of what we have been through. We always keep this matter very closely under review.

I have no doubt that in 1954 when passports were conceded it was thought that there was no likely danger of the promise needing to be kept in such numbers. Does not this large potential influx of over a quarter of a million point to the need to go back to the basic question of considering citizenship as the basis for entry and residence in this country? Would it not be better if we were to review once again the Act which was passed last year, when this principle was raised from both sides of the House, and try to determine it so that we avoid getting into these tangles?

The right hon. Gentleman had the opportunity of doing this. I have said that we keep these matters under review.

Is not the difficulty about this situation that the option appears to be open for such a long time? Will my right hon. Friend enter into negotiations with the countries concerned to see whether the option can be terminated in time?

We can and will review all these matters. It is not desirable at this moment to make statements about these matters. We are in the middle of a very tricky operation with the Ugandan Asians. I can only note what my hon. Friend says and promise that we will keep this matter under very close review. The figures I have stated have been known for a good many years. They have not varied. I have made the latest possible check. The figure varies in only small degree from what was said a year or two ago.

In view of the exaggerated statements which have been made about Britain's potential obligations in respect of the so-called Queen's Chinese in Penang and Malacca, will the right hon. Gentleman consider making a statement making completely precise what Britain's obligations are in respect of dual citizens holding both Malaysian and United Kingdom citizenship in Malaysia?

Yes; I will certainly do that.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will refer the situation in Uganda to the Security Council for a determination under Article 29 of the Charter of the United Nations.

No. But I must reserve the right to use any part of the United Nations machinery if it seems likely to serve the interests of the Ugandan Asians or of this country.

Is not the situation in Uganda a threat to the peace within within the terms of Article 9 just as much at any rate as was the situation six years ago in Rhodesia where the question of domestic jurisdiction was not held to invalidate the reference? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that not nearly enough is being done in the United Nations in regard to what is a clear breach of international law on the part of the Ugandan Government?

The question of a breach of the peace would first arise in relation to a possible conflict with Tanzania. The Tanzanian Government have not brought this to the United Nations or requested any action under Article 39. It would be difficult to establish in the United Nations that this is a breach of the peace under Article 39, whatever our opinion may be and notwithstanding the just comparison with the Rhodesian situation which my right hon. and learned Friend makes.

I certainly would not wish in any way to criticise but rather to praise the action the Government have taken in a thoroughly compassionate and laudable way over the reception of the Asians here and the attempts the Government have made to persuade other countries to help in taking them in. However, does my right hon. Friend realise that in the country as a whole there is a very considerable misunderstanding about the reasons why my right hon. Friend has not felt able to take more decisive action yet in the United Nations? Will he consider laying a White Paper so that the country can be fully informed about what Her Majesty's Government's policy is in regard to United Nations action on this matter?

I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion. I am not sure that a White Paper is the best way to convey Her Majesty's Government's policy to the country on these matters. There is a wide variety of action which we could take in the United Nations. We must recognise the limitations of that body. If one takes action, one wants it to be effective. I would keep all the options open in relation to the future use of the United Nations machinery.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether, in view of the actions taken by the Government of Uganda, he will now take steps as soon as possible to effect that country's expulsion from the Commonwealth.

Care for the plight of the Asian refugees and their property must be our first concern. The Commonwealth may be able to influence the Ugandan Government for example in relation to compensation for property.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. The House will support the general concept of playing Uganda cool, at least until the refugees have been extracted from that sorry land. But does not my right hon. Friend agree that Uganda and its Government appear to be cocking a snook at the whole institution of the Commonwealth and should not get away with it, and that we should at least take action and express our bitterest regret and annoyance at their whole attitude, and even cast in doubt the merit of Uganda's remaining in the Commonwealth?

I have said on many occasions, and repeat now, that the actions of General Amin have been totally inconsistent with any civilised standard of behaviour. Perhaps the best use of the Commonwealth is to influence people who go astray, but, as I have said, I should like to review the whole of our relations when the operation is over.

While I do not disagree with the right hon. Gentleman's immediate answer, does he agree that the Commonwealth is either an institution in which all races are treated equally or it will be nothing, that the present behaviour of the Ugandan Government is incompatible with membership of the Commonwealth, though they may change, and that it is extremely difficult to justify a perfectly right expulsion of South Africa while retaining Uganda in the Commonwealth?

The Ugandan Government's behaviour is certainly incompatible with the standards we would expect of a Commonwealth member.

If the Commonwealth supports sanctions against Rhodesia, why does it not now support sanctions against Uganda, as a deterrent to any other potential racialistic dictator?

That is a matter that can no doubt be put to members of the Commonwealth if and when they meet, perhaps later on in 1973.

Bearing in mind that any decision to expel Uganda could only be one for all Commonwealth Governments, presumably acting in unanimity, will the right hon. Gentleman consider informing other Commonwealth Governments that it is our opinion that Uganda's behaviour is such that expulsion is appropriate? Will he consider an innovation in the idea of suspension from Commonwealth membership until such time as Uganda acquires a Government which are fit to abide by the principles of Commonwealth membership?

I fully understand the hon. Gentleman's feelings, which I think are shared by most hon. Members, including myself. The actions of the Ugandan Government have been intolerable. I do not necessarily conclude from that as yet that they should be expelled from the Commonwealth, but the Commonwealth must be aware of this behaviour, and perhaps it will see fit to take action of some kind.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will now protest to the Soviet authorities concerning the proposal to impose a ransom upon Jewish scientists seeking repatriation to the State of Israel, and whether in view of the new tax he will now raise the plight of Academician Benjamin Levich, who was appointed to a Fellowship by University College, Oxford.

On 19th September the Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office drew the attention of a senior official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union to the strength of feeling in this country on the question of Soviet Jews and specifically to the tax on emigrants. Her Majesty's Government have no responsibility in the matter of the treatment by the Soviet Government of individual Soviet citizens and are, therefore, unable to make representations in such cases.

May I first thank the Minister for his answer and for having seen that these representations were made. I ask him to keep this matter particularly in mind as there have been certain relaxations in the last week which are welcome, but Academician Levich and others have indicated to me that they regard the situation as particularly dangerous because still they have no visas and still people may be fooled into think- ing that the present methods have been relaxed. May I have the right hon. Gentleman's assurance that he will if necessary raise the matter in the way he has in the past?

I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for the first part of his supplementary question and I gladly give the assurance that we will do anything we can in the difficult matter. I think that he understands the difficulty, but we will certainly do what we can.

Can my right hon. Friend take this matter further and in the light of this precedent bring to the attention of the Soviet Government their treatment of Ukrainian intellectuals and writers, and intellectuals and thinkers of other minorities in the Soviet Union who are also experiencing persecution?

We always regret any such action within a State, but we must recognise the limitations upon us with regard to citizens of those States. It is for that reason that it is not possible to go as far as my hon. Friend would wish.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be assured that on both sides of the House there is strong approbation of the attitude he has taken to the recent relaxation on the part of the Soviet Union in regard to this religious minority and in particular in regard to this very distinguished man whose case, while not being special in relation to others who have suffered terribly in the past few years for these reasons, is nevertheless unique in that he must be regarded as being part of the normal interchange of intellectual, cultural and scientific knowledge between civilised countries?

Yes, Sir. I do not dispute what the right hon. Gentleman says. This is a matter which must be of concern to us all, but I have had to explain the limitations imposed on us in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now recognise the German Democratic Republic.

No, Sir.

Does the hon. Gentleman welcome the recent series of agreements aimed at ending the division between East and West in Europe? If so, is not recognition the logical next step in that direction, and what is the reason for delay?

Of course we welcome the agreements which have been made over the past year, but it would not be appropriate to recognise the GDR while the Federal Government were seeking to normalise relations, and they have not finished doing so yet. We should also have to be satisfied that recognition was compatible with our international obligations, in particular with our special responsibilities for Berlin and for Germany as a whole.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that it is widely believed that there is a keen desire in both East and West Germany for the normalisation of relations and recognition of the acceptance of two separate countries there, and that it is widely believed that this country is among those that are dragging their feet on the issue and preventing an agreement which would otherwise come about? Would the hon. Gentleman care to deny the suggestion which has been made?

Yes, Sir. It is quite untrue. We are not dragging our feet at all. The General Transport Treaty between the FGR and the GDR, ratified by the East Germans on 16th October, is only part of the Federal German Republic's efforts to achieve normalisation of relations with the East Germans. While negotiations continue it would be inappropriate for Her Majesty's Government to take any steps which might enhance the status of the GDR and prejudice the success of the negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what advice about the South African Government's policies is given in South Africa by his Department's representatives to British businessmen visiting that country.

Information and advice on the South African Government's policies as they may affect British businessmen are given on request by the Commercial Departments of the Embassy and our Consulates-General.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the only advice his Department's representatives are giving to British businesmen in South Africa is to follow local custom? As Britain is South Africa's largest overseas investor, and consequently is seen by Africans as propping up apartheid, is it not time that this country told its own businessmen that they either act as agents of social change in South Africa or get out?

We have made it clear on a number of occasions that Her Majesty's Government do not believe in the policies of boycott and ostracism for South Africa, any more than did the previous Government, which the hon. Gentleman supported. As to the information we give, we have given our firms there every encouragement to conduct their businesses in the best possible way in South Africa.

Does the hon. Gentleman advise businessmen visiting South Africa that South Africa's presence in Namibia is illegal, as laid down by the International Court of Justice, and therefore discourage British businessmen taking part in an internationally recognised illegal act?

The hon. Gentleman is misinformed. It is not accepted that South Africa's presence in Namibia is illegal. Therefore, we do not so advise British businessmen.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what official communication and contact is maintained by representatives of his Department in South Africa with the National Union of South African Students.

The Ambassador's official contacts are with the South African Government to whom he is accredited. But he and his staff naturally keep in touch with a wide spectrum of political, social and economic opinion, including representatives of the organisation mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in fact, his Department's representative's contacts with NUSAS are very sparing and slight indeed? As this is one of the few non-racial organisations left in South Africa and as the South African Government are doing their best to crush NUSAS in a highly rigged and biased parliamentary commission, will his Department do its best not only to strengthen links with NUSAS but also offer some kind of support?

The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. The Embassy in South Africa is in close contact with NUSAS and with a large number of other multiracial organisations. I know that the hon. Gentleman, when he was recently in South Africa, took very biased information about what is going on there.

Will my hon. Friend say what instructions are given by his Department to our representatives in Moscow about maintaining contact with organisations which the Soviet Government are trying to crush?

We are anxious to make contact with other organisations but we are not allowed to do so there.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next intends to visit Indonesia.

My right hon. Friend paid an official visit to Indonesia in July and has no plans at present to pay a further visit.

Did the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary seize the opportunity to explain to the Indonesian Government that those of us who would like to see better relations with Indonesia are exercised by the fact that there are probably more political prisoners in Indonesia in proportion to the population than in any other country in the world, that this very much exercises world public opinion and that it would be an earnest of good intentions if the Indonesians at least released the category C prisoners?

The question of political detainees must be a matter of Indonesian internal affairs. It would be quite inappropriate for Her Majesty's Government to comment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what has now been the outcome of his discussionns with Indonesia about compensation for British assets in that country.

My right hon. Friend told the Indonesian authorities in Djakarta in July of our concern at the delay in settling the compensation claims. The Indonesian Minister of State for Economic, Financial and Industrial Affairs assured our Ambassador in writing on 21st October that compensation would be paid and that his Government would very soon make proposals.

That is splendid news. Can my hon. Friend give us any indication of the sums involved in the British assets which were seized? Are they around £200 million, as had been previously suggested?

I cannot tell my hon. Friend the exact sums involved but I shall try to let him have the figures as soon as they are available. The Indonesian Government have given first priority to claims from any firms wishing to take back their estates. All major British claims for the return of estates have now been settled.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement about the loss of Mr. David Roy Adams, a district officer in the Solomon Islands, who was reported missing on 12th September.

The High Commissioner Western Pacific reported that Mr. Adams was missing presumed drowned at sea whilst on duty on 12th September. A thorough search was unsuccessful.

I am sure that my hon. Friend will join me in expressing sympathy to the parents and relatives of Mr. Adams in this country. Bearing in mind that the inquiry started over a month ago, can he say why the details are not yet available? Will he meanwhile say what was the unladen weight or the overall length of the ship concerned?

I am very glad to join my right hon. and learned Friend in his expressions of sympathy. As to the delay, he will bear in mind the very scattered nature of the territory and the fact that the search vessels concerned dispersed after the search, and that it was necessary to get the evidence of their crews before the inquiry could be properly concluded. I do not know the size of vessel but it was quite small. I understand that it is likely that Mr. Adams fell overboard where a rail was missing, but I cannot say with certainty whether that is so. Unfortunately, Mr. Adams was not a swimmer.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about his recent official visit to Hong Kong.

My right hon. Friend paid an official visit to Hong Kong in February last and plans to pass through Hong Kong on 2nd–3rd November on his way back from China. I am looking forward to visiting Hong Kong from 11th to 15th November. I shall be having wide-ranging discussions with the Governor, officials and leading members of the community.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that information will be very welcome? As half the population of Hong Kong are under 21 years of age, will my hon. Friend give particular attention during his visit to policies designed to capture the imagination of these young people?

I share my hon. Friend's views about this. The Governor is to provide increasing opportunities for all young people in all fields.

Will the hon. Gentleman take a special look at the development that has gone on in co-operatives for fishermen in Hong Kong, with a view to advising his right hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development of further help that he might be able to give to that excellent development?

I shall certainly look into that whilst I am in the colony.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations Her Majesty's Minister to the Holy See made to the Vatican on the Irish problem; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister had the opportunity to discuss Northern Ireland with His Holiness the Pope during their meeting on Wednesday, 4th October. Her Majesty's Minister to the Holy See keeps the Vatican fully informed about developments in Northern Ireland.

While the visit of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the Pope was most welcome, is not the fullest understanding with the Holy See on these grave problems most important? Therefore, is this not a time when the Government might reconsider the status of the British mission?

I told the House on 27th March in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) that I am keeping the matter under review. I do not wish to forecast at this stage. Relations between Her Majesty's Government and the Holy See remain cordial, and I am not aware that our Minister to the Holy See is in any way hindered in his activities by his present status.

Does my hon. Friend recall that he and his numerous predecessors in that office have been reviewing this matter for at least six years? Would it be reasonable to expect something to emerge within a reasonable time from this examination in such detail?

It would be reasonable, but I do not think it will be possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reply he has sent to the Secretary-General of the United Nations in response to his invitation to offer views and suggestions relating to a world disarmament conference.

Our reply, which was given to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 29th August, said in brief that we would favour a world disarmament conference provided that it had the general support of the United Nations membership and in particular of all the nuclear Powers. It must also be carefully and adequately prepared. With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will circulate the full text of our reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask him whether he would consider suggesting that the opportunity should be seized for discussing a more positive basis of international co-operation such as a world peace-keeping force with more effective international judicial machinery?

I would certainly welcome that idea if we could get it off the ground. It is an objective that many of us have shared for many years, but the hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware of the difficulties. So far as a world disarmament conference is concerned, the responses of some countries have been very discouraging, and this applies in particular to more than one of the nuclear Powers. Therefore, we should not build too great hopes at the moment. However, I hope to be in New York later this week to have discussions on this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the United Kingdom's application to join the European Economic Community.

As the House is well aware, the European Communities Act is now on the Statute Book. We have deposited our Instrument of Ratification of the Accession Treaty and the United Kingdom will become a full member of the European Communities on 1st January, 1973. Denmark, too, has ratified and will also become a full member on the same date. The Norwegian decision in no way affects the position of this country.

Does the Foreign Secretary believe that we should remain in the EEC at any cost, even if the effects on our cost of living and our balance of payments situation turn out to be disastrous?

The hon. Member will appreciate that we have gone into the Community on a carefully calculated cost, not at any cost.

Has the Foreign Secretary, in spite of what he has just said, made clear to our new partners in the European Economic Community that the overwhelming majority of people in this country are opposed to the Community in its present form and that they will never forgive this Government for forcing them into the Community without consulting them or obtaining any kind of agreement from the majority of the people in the country? If our European partners know that, they will know that the European Economic Community as at present constituted rests on a very insecure foundation so far as this country is concerned.

That is the hon. Gentleman's opinion—mine happens to be slightly different—about what people in this country think. Anyhow we shall see at the next General Election.

Then can we have it next week?

asked the Secretary of State for Wales (1) how many Welsh housing authorities have made representations to him about the discontinuance of the special subsidy for the use of slate for roofing purposes and if he will make a statement;

My right hon. and learned Friend has received no representations direct from any Welsh housing authority but the right hon. Member and my hon. Friend the Member for Conway (Mr. Wyn Roberts) have forwarded to him a letter addressed to them by Ffestiniog Urban District Council.

While thanking the Minister of State for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that various authorities in whose areas slate is produced and used are concerned about the possibility of their coming out less well under the 1972 Act than under the 1967 Act? Will he, in order to check the percentages which he has just given, meet those authorities—there are only half a dozen of them—on the spot and discuss their apprehensions with them?

I would certainly have no objection to going to considerable lengths to put their fears at rest. Fortunately, the answer that I have given to the right hon. Gentleman is highly satisfactory.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action is being taken to protect the British textile industry against unfair foreign competition.

The British textile industry is protected both by quantitative restrictions on cotton products and by tariffs. We also have power to impose anti-dumping duties on imports which are dumped and are causing or threatening material injury to a United Kingdom industry.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. However, perhaps he is aware, as I am, that the textile industry in this country has suffered more than any other industry from contraction and redundancies over the last 50 years. Is he satisfied that even with the figures which he has just spelt out, the Government are doing enough for this industry which is so vital to Lancashire and Cheshire? Is he assured that their interests are safeguarded in the European Economic Community?

The Government certainly appreciate the problems that this industry has had to face. I think I can say that we have no formal applications on hand at present for anti-dumping action. We are in touch with several sectors of the industry which are considering the problems involved, and of course the Government will deal with these matters if they should arise.

Can my hon. Friend indicate whether it is his intention to continue the tariffs and quotas beyond 31st December, 1972?

If my hon. Friend is asking "Will anti-dumping action be possible when we join the EEC and after that period?" the answer is "Yes".

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions his Department has now had with the Hawker Siddeley company on the development and potential of the A300B Airbus.

There are regular contacts between my Department and the company on this and other aircraft projects on which it is engaged.

I thank my hon. Friend for his answer, but is he aware that Hawker Siddeley is, perhaps, the only aero-manufacturing company in this country which works at a profit? Does he not feel that the company has been starved of Government contracts and that they have gone, perhaps ill-advisedly, to other areas?

The Government would certainly pay tribute to Hawker-Siddeley for all that it does in the aircraft industry, and I gladly do that. However, we have received no request for Government assistance towards any further development of the A300B airbus.