Present:

• The Prime Minister (Mr. St-Laurent) in the Chair,
• The Minister of Trade and Commerce and Minister of Defence Production ( Mr. Howe),
• The Minister of Agriculture ( Mr. Gardiner),
• The Minister of National Revenue (Dr. McCann),
• The Minister of Labour ( Mr. Gregg),
• The Secretary of State for External Affairs ( Mr. Pearson),
• The Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson),
• The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters),
• The Minister of Veterans Affairs and Postmaster General ( Mr. Lapointe),
• The Minister of Finance (Mr. Harris),
• The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Prudham),
• The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair),
• The Minister of National Defence (Mr. Campney),
• The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration ( Mr. Pickersgill),
• The Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources ( Mr. Lesage),
• The Secretary to the Cabinet (Mr. Bryce),
• The Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet (Mr. Martin),
• The Registrar of the Cabinet (Mr. Halliday).

. . .

N.A.T.O. MINISTERIAL MEETING, DECEMBER, 1956

5. The Secretary of State for External Affairs reported on the forthcoming N.A.T.O. ministerial meeting at Paris, beginning December 11th. This was the regular meeting but it promised to be a very important one. It had been thought that the United States Secretary of State would be unable to attend but Mr. Dulles had made a rapid recovery and was now expected to go.⁵⁶ Three main subjects would be dealt with, - the report of the Committee of Three on non-military co-operation in the organization,⁵⁷ a review of the world situation, and a military review.⁵⁸

The Committee of Three report had been re-written in the last three weeks in the light of the present international situation. All of the items discussed previously were there but put into a stronger form. Increased political consultation was urged and it was pointed out that co-operation between N.A.T.O. governments had deteriorated since the committee began its task. Important initiatives had been taken by members without prior consultation and unity had been strained. All of these divergencies, if not remedied, might cause the break up of the organization. Certain new procedures were recommended but no actual change in the organization.

The report was negative on the economic side as it was felt that the organization should not get into this field except through consultation on economic matters of political concern. On the whole, the report was not of outstanding significance but the political introduction was very realistic.

The political directive to be given to the military planners of N.A.T.O. could not be discussed and decided on at the present time because it was not yet ready. There would be the usual review of the military programmes and this year some harsh things were apt to be said.

6. Mr. Pearson added that the meeting would last four days and far reaching conclusions might emerge. There would also be the appointment of a new secretary- general. Other finance and defence ministers would be there and he hoped both Mr. Harris and Mr. Campney would be able to go over with him.

7. During the discussion the following observations were made:

(a) Unless the United Kingdom changed its mind, it was likely to announce drastic reductions in the British element of the N.A.T.O. forces. A great deal of the U.K. force had already been taken away, on the understanding that they would be sent back when the Middle East disturbances were over, but it did not look as if this would now be done.

(b) Suggestions had been made to postpone this meeting in view of the unfavourable political atmosphere and the expectation of wrangling. However, there were many reasons why this should not be done. It might be said that N.A.T.O. was afraid to meet. Mr. Dulles was to be there and his presence could lead to a better understanding between the major allies.

8. The Cabinet noted the report of the Secretary of State for External Affairs on matters to be discussed at the forthcoming ministerial meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

. . .