567
Business of the House HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Morrison: I expect to be in a position to make an announcement next week.
Mr. Kenneth Lindsay: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of a Debate on the universities, in view of the many reports recently published and the fact that over £20 million is being spent in this connection by different Government Departments?
Mr. Morrison: That is a matter which should come up for consideration on the Estimates. I cannot very well give up a day out of the Government's time for a Debate on this subject.
Mr. Lipson: Has the right hon. Gentle- man considered the request made to him last week for the suspension of the Rule for one hour for today's Debate?
Mr. Morrison: I have kept my ears open, but I have found no response, except from my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes) and now from the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Mr. Lipson). On the whole, I think we shall have a tidier Debate if we finish in the ordinary way.
Colonel Stoddart-Scott: Will the right hon. Gentleman give some indication when the promised Amending Bill to the National Health Services Act is likely to be introduced, as it was promised last Session and no mention was made of it in the King's Speech?
Mr. Morrison: That Bill is under con- sideration. I cannot say when it will be forthcoming, but it will not be this side of Christmas. The hon. and gallant Member can be assured that it is not overlooked. I have every anticipation that it will be produced this Session.
109 M 20
蓝盆
Foreign Affairs
568
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn."- [Mr. Whiteley.] 3.35 p.m.
The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Ernest Bevin): The range of the problems still to be solved as the result of the aftermath of war is so vast and their complexity is so great that one is naturally tempted, in dealing with foreign affairs, to say something touching on all these problems. Many Members have been in communication with me in the hope that I would deal with this or that phase of foreign affairs, but in examining the problem I came to the con- clusion that there would not be time and that it would not be conducive to con- centration of thought and effort if I followed that course today. I propose, therefore, subject to two exceptions, to concentrate in the main on the problems of Europe and the Western World.
Before I proceed to deal with Europe, there is one matter which I know is occupying the minds of many Members, and about which they will expect me to say something; that is the question of China. This unfortunate country has been striken now for over 40 years with revolution, war and civil war. Com- munist armies have obtained control over a vast area of Northern China and are now threatening Nanking. No one can forecast at present where these armies will be halted, or how far their influence will extend.
I ought to make clear what our attitude to China has been. It has been governed by the Moscow Declaration of December, 1945, in which the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union de- clared a policy of non-intervention in the internal affairs of China. His Majesty's Government have consistently followed a policy in accordance with that under- standing. Inevitably, as a result of the war-time strategy of the Allies and post- war circumstances, the United States Government have been more directly con- cerned with assistance to China than this country. We have explained to the Chinese Government, whose position we understand, that -our financial and economic position precluded us from doing anything very material for China. However, in view of the tremendous up- heaval of this civil war we cannot be
569
Foreign Affairs
570
tant cases I understand that votes are now taking place, and until I get the final information as to the decisions I cannot very well discuss them.
Foreign Affairs 9 DECEMBER 1948
adifferent to the fate of either our national or our extensive trading interests in China. I can assure the House that we are watching the matter very care- fully, and it is our earnest hope that both parties in the conflict will respect British Îives and property.
Meanwhile, His Majesty's Embassy at Nanking and the consulates in China are remaining at their posts and carrying out their tasks. Some weeks ago we suggested that British subjects who had no particular purpose for remaining in the area of conflict should consider the advisability of leaving, and some of them have taken this advice; but, in general, it appears that British subjects who have business interests in China are remaining at their posts. I am sure the House will join with me in paying tribute to the steadfast manner in which the British communities in China, together with our diplomatic and consular staffs, are facing the difficult situation which is now con- fronting them.
No one can foresee what the outcome of the present world struggle will be, but it must be the hope of the whole world that peace may soon be restored and the patient, long-suffering Chinese people, who are the victims of all these con- flicts, may at last have the opportunity of restoring their shattered economy and be free from the ravages of civil and external wars [HON, MEMBERS: "Hear, hear." I am glad to hear those “ Hear, hears," I hope they will be passed on to the right quarter and that this will assist in stopping this conflict. As far as His Majesty's Government are concerned, if peace is restored and reconstruction is initiated, we shall do our best to assist in whatever way we can.
The other question I wish to refer to is the question of the United Nations General Assembly. The proceedings are not yet concluded. They will conclude shortly, but it will be observed that the United Nations have been sitting since 21st September. They have been unable to complete the agenda, and it has been decided to continue the present Session in New York next April. Many prob- lems have been faced, and if hon. Mem- bers want to raise points in the Debate my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secre- tary will deal with them at the close in his reply. I do not, therefore, propose to go through the agenda or the discus- sions, especially as in some very impor-
109 M 21
constant.
Therefore, as I indicated in my open- ing remarks, I turn to Europe. The broad objectives of the foreign policy of His Majesty's Government were set out in the speech I delivered to the House on 22nd January. I also explained in a speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations on 27th September our general approach to these world problems. Our policy has remained For the past year we have been building as rapidly as possible a solid structure for Europe. I must make it clear, therefore, that I have no new policy to announce today. What I hope to do is to give the House a progress report on the results of the policy we had to adopt owing to the failure of the Four-Power arrangements in November of last year on policy which I reviewed in my address to the House on 22nd January.
One of the burning questions asso- ciated with this policy is, of course, Berlin. I need not tell the House that the blockade still continues. The failure of the three Western Powers to reach agreement with the Soviet Union caused us after the most careful consideration to refer the matter to the Security Council of the United Nations. This was done in conformity with our obligations under the Charter. When governments cannot settle a difference they should, under these obligations, refer the matter to the United Nations. That we have done, and I hope to make it clear that this procedure does not only apply to a quarrel between two small nations or a big nation with a small one; it applies to big nations themselves in the case of We followed the con- disagreement. sistent course of using the machinery of the United Nations.
After protracted discussion the Presi- dent of the Security Council drafted a resolution designed to meet the require- ments of both parties. That resolution involved the raising of the blockade and the steps to be taken immediately, there- after, to introduce a single currency in Berlin under Four-Power control. The resolution was accepted by six neutral Powers and by the three Western Powers, but, as the House knows, it was vetoed by