House of Commons Hansard Debates for 3 Nov 1993

Mr. Wareing : Does the Minister realise that the answer that he just gave on relations between Belize and Guatemala is different from those given by his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel- Jones), to me and to one or two of my colleagues only a few months ago? They we were told that everything was stable. Given that, even at that time, there was no agreement on the territorial waters dispute between the two countries, is it not premature to consider withdrawing British forces from Belize, where they give people confidence? Are the British Government about to do in Belize what they did when they withdrew the Endeavour from the Falkland Islands?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : Belize became independent in 1981 and it was always envisaged that the British garrison might be removed, especially in the light of the 1991 recognition by Guatemala of the independence and sovereignty of Belize. That recognition has not been withdrawn. In answer to the previous question, I made clear our continuing concern and interest in the security of the region, and our continuing military involvement, albeit at a lower level.

Mr. Garel-Jones : As a general principle, dictatorships cause and start wars and democracies win them. Does my hon. Friend agree that events in Guatemala, following the removal of President Serrano, demonstrate the way in which central America, and indeed Latin America as a whole, has consolidated behind a democratic president in that republic?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : The continuity of British foreign policy in Latin America is demonstrated by the fact that I entirely agree with what my right hon. Friend has just said.

European Foreign Policies

8. Sir David Knox : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he proposes to have discussions with his European Community partners concerning the development of common European foreign policies.

Mr. Hurd : I meet our partners regularly to discuss the strengthening of intergovernmental co-operation on foreign policy.

Sir David Knox : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the development of common European Community foreign policies will be greatly facilitated by the Maastricht treaty, and that that will enable the Community, with the participation of Britain, to exert greater influence in the world?

Column 337

Mr. Hurd : What happened at the summit on Friday illustrates my hon. Friend's point. There is no question of our being cajoled or out- voted, because of the treaty of Maastricht, into policies of which we disapprove. What happened, in an orderly way, was that the summit began to identify and tell the Foreign Ministers to pursue areas where it thought that they should act together. One example has already been given in the House : we shall help to monitor the elections in South Africa, to the extent that South Africans want us to. The same is true of the Russian elections next month : we suggested that there should be EC monitoring if the Russians want it, which they do. Another example is the contribution that we make towards implementing the peace process--getting Jericho and Gaza and the occupied territories into a better state to assume more responsibilities. Those are things which it makes sense for Europe to do together.

Mr. Barnes : How will we find out what Foreign Ministers are up to in the European Community, when the Council of Foreign Affairs Ministers has just decided that it is now possible to block the publication of votes that come out of their meetings? We are supposed to be in favour of openness. As a result of the Edinburgh summit of Heads of State it was agreed that those votes would be published so that we would know what was taking place : will the Minister guarantee that that situation will not be changed?

Mr. Hurd : There are no votes on those matters--they are of unanimity--and the hon. Gentleman will get his information in the same way as he has always got it : by making my life uncomforable in the House of Commons. One addition that is taking place was outlined by the Government in their recent memorandum to the House of Lords European Community Committee, in which we suggested that Ministers could offer briefings in both Houses on important common foreign and security policy issues. We are willing to do that in addition to arrangements that already exist on the Floor of the House and in Committee to cross examine Ministers and officials.

Mr. Cormack : Would it not be a splendid, if modest, start to the new post-Maastricht era if the nations of the Community could ensure that this winter the starving and suffering people of Sarajevo receive adequate aid and that no one is allowed to stop it getting through?

Mr. Hurd : It is best to do exactly that. As my hon. Friend knows, we have a strong record on that, both in the quality of aid that we are providing, particularly medicines, and in the efforts that our civilian drivers and troops are making to get the convoys through. The lines of communication through Serb-held territory now work reasonably well. The main problem arises partly from renewed shelling around Sarajevo, which has subsided, and fighting between Muslims and Croats in central Bosnia. I hope that the initiative that we took on Friday will enable David Owen and our local commanders to make it more possible to get that aid through. It is certainly a high priority.

Dr. John Cunningham : I welcome what the Secretary of State said about the practicability of the European Community acting together in foreign policy. That commends itself to everyone. But what evidence is there, from the weak and vague statement on the situation in

Column 338

Bosnia issued following the latest Council of Ministers, that any material change will take place in the circumstances which tragically prevail in Bosnia?

Although I emphatically support and praise the contribution of British troops in UNPROFOR, will the airlift to Sarajevo be stepped up as a result of last Friday's meeting? Will the finance for winter aid be increased as a result of that meeting? As a result of last Friday's discussions, will there be a serious attempt to halt, once and for all, Serbian and Croatian aggression in Bosnia? What practical difference have the discussions in Brussels made to the European Community's common approach to the problem in Bosnia?

Mr. Hurd : First, the Sarajevo airlift continues in full flight and at full intensity whenever it safely can and is extremely important, although most of the supplies reaching the area come from Belgrade by road through Serb areas. On the hon. Gentleman's second point, about total finance, we are in close touch with Mrs. Ogata. Our total contribution so far has been £51 million. The difficulty is not so much lack of resources as lack of access, which leads to the hon. Gentleman's third point.

In last Friday's discussions, I was anxious to avoid politicians in Brussels saying that, as from Friday afternoon, such and such a road is open and safe, when within 12 hours that could be contradicted. Rhetoric has been the enemy in this problem all the way through. What the United Nations needs is more troops. I hope that it may not be long before there are, for example, Malaysian troops in UNPROFOR, which would enable troops now in Bihac, for example, to be redeployed along the access roads. We are constantly urging and working for that. We are doing our bit in central Bosnia--the right hon. Gentleman was right about that--with the techniques at which our troops are good. The idea that we could get more aid through by using armed force is contradicted--

Dr. John Cunningham : I did not say that.

Mr. Hurd : No, but it is widely suggested--and it is contradicted by all the experts and evidence on the ground. We must work with the resources that we have and try to increase those resources, whether they are United Nations soldiers or money for the agencies. We are doing both.

Mr. Cash : In his discussions with Community partners who are members of the Christian Democratic party, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to repudiate any notion of majority voting in foreign policy matters, as laid down in the Athens declaration--the basic programme of the European People's party? Conservative Members will then be in no doubt that our party will have nothing to do with majority voting in relation to foreign policy, and specifically with regard to any actions connected with Bosnia, in line with the guidelines prescribed recently by the Council of Ministers.

Mr. Hurd : The position is perfectly clear in the Maastricht treaty. My hon. Friend, and other Conservative Members, may have contested the wisdom of the treaty, but he can now rely on its provisions in this regard with complete confidence.

Mr. Mandelson : Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the development of common European foreign policies requires the development of much greater public understanding of, and support for, those policies, not least

Column 339

among young people? Is it not a backward move for the Foreign Office to propose cutting off its funding and support for a national organisation that is committed to those aims--the British Youth Council, with which, like the Secretary of State for Employment, I have been associated in the past? Will the Foreign Secretary reconsider the proposal, and stop it being implemented?

Mr. Hurd : The British Youth Council has done, and continues to do, admirable work. Given all the pressures on my budget, however, I must consider whether the Foreign Office should continue to support it, and how it ranks in relation to the other demands on my resources--scholarships, the British Council and the BBC world service, for instance. I have concluded that I cannot continue to support the British Youth Council with Foreign Office funds.

Eastern Europe

9. Mr. Jenkin : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with EC Commissioners and the Governments of the other member states about trade with and aid to the former communist countries of Europe.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : Along with other Ministers, I discuss the issue regularly with other Community member states.

EC support, through the removal of trade barriers and through carefully targeted technical assistance, is vital to restore economic growth in those countries, and to consolidate their economic and political reforms.

Mr. Jenkin : Does my hon. Friend agree that, although the aid programmes for former communist countries in eastern Europe are very welcome, they are no substitute for free trade? What those countries really want is the removal of tariff and non-tariff restrictions from their goods so that they can access the markets of the European Community. Is not that the only way they will be able to rebuild their economies?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Trade is far superior to aid as an instrument to help social and political reforms in those countries. That is why the British Governments have been at the forefront of the calls for trade liberalisation. We know that those newly free countries stand to gain most from being able to produce and sell their goods to the European Community. In exchange, that will provide additional opportunities for British and Community exporters.

Mr. Macdonald : One of the former communist countries most in need of aid is Bosnia. Will the Minister ask his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary what he meant when he said that the airlift to Sarajevo was at full stretch? In the past month, only half the minimum survival ration that the United Nations has designated for the people of Sarajevo has been delivered. It is supposed to be 600gm of food per person per day, but has amounted to only 300gm. The Berlin airlift lasted for fewer days but delivered 2 million tonnes of aid. The Sarajevo airlift has delivered only 60,000 tonnes. Is it not clear that much more can be done by means of the airlift, without risk to soldiers on land

Column 340

convoys, to deliver the minimum amount of aid that the United Nations has said is necessary for the people of Sarajevo?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : The aid effort to the former Yugoslavia is fully stretched, taking into account the safety and danger constraints upon us, which I am sure the hon. Gentleman recognises. We are always seeking opportunities to improve the flow of aid and its security. The record of this country in financial terms is extremely good, because in overall terms we have contributed some £150 million to the former Yugoslavia, both through the European Community and through bilateral aid. Our record bears comparison with that of any of our allies.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton : Have my hon. Friend and his Department made any assessment of the impact of the transfer of manufacturing capacity from the United Kingdom and other European Community countries to eastern European countries? What will be the impact of that on jobs in the EC countries, including our own?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : My hon. Friend perhaps regards free trade primarily as a threat. I regard it as an opportunity to build up the stability and prosperity of those countries, and to provide new markets for British exports. I remind my hon. Friend that the European Community currently has a large balance of payments surplus with those countries.

Ms Quin : Given the importance of trade, has the Minister studied the latest trade figures issued by the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development which show, sadly, that the United Kingdom has fallen a long way behind not only Germany but Italy and France in the volume of trade that we conduct with the countries of eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, particularly in exports? What will the Government do to ensure that the situation is treated with the urgency that it deserves, and that our trading relations with those countries are as close and as beneficial as possible in future?

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : I welcome the hon. Lady to her position on the Labour Front Bench and I hope that she will remain there for a long time. Our export performance to central and eastern Europe must, indeed, be improved ; that is why we believe in lowering trade barriers and liberalising trade. I am pleased to have the hon. Lady's support for that policy.

Japan

10. Mr. Thomason : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the United Kingdom's relations with Japan.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Alastair Goodlad) : Our relations with Japan are excellent. My righthon. Friend the Prime Minister visited Japan from 18 to 21 September, where he held wide-ranging talks with Prime Minister Hosokawa and other Ministers soon after they took office. He and the delegation of senior British business men who accompanied him, confirmed our positive approach to our trading relationship with Japan and stressed the continuing welcome for Japanese manufacturing investment in the United Kingdom.

Column 341

Mr. Thomason : Does my right hon. Friend agree that continued inward investment from Japan is essential, particularly in areas such as the west midlands, and that it is enhanced by retaining and improving our existing diplomatic relations with Japan? Does he also agree that the Foreign Office has a vital role to play in enhancing and improving inward investment opportunities?

Mr. Goodlad : Yes. The British share of Japanese investment in the European Community during the financial year 1992-93 was more than 44 per cent. of the total. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department of Trade and Industry work very closely with the West Midlands development agency, both here and in Tokyo, to promote Japanese inward investment in the region. An inward investment mission from Japan, sponsored by the Invest in Britain Bureau, has visited the west midlands during the past fortnight. I hope that those investors will smile on Bromsgrove, in whose interests my hon. Friend is such a doughty fighter.

Mr. Cryer : Is not the inward investment from Japan only possible because of its enormous manufacturing success and the balance of payments surpluses that Japan enjoys with most other major manufacturing countries throughout the world? Will the Minister discuss with the Japanese how they achieve that, while we apparently cannot achieve it and are subordinated to the other countries of the Common Market so as to provide a large internal market for our manufacturing industry? Why should we be beholden to the Common Market when the example of Japan demonstrates that that is not necessary?

Mr. Goodlad : The House will be unsurprised to learn that the hon. Gentleman is wrong as usual. Exports from this country to Japan in the first part of this year were up by nearly 19 per cent. compared with last year's results,

Column 342

despite depressed levels of demand in Japan due to its current economic difficulties. The whole House, with the exception of the hon. Gentleman, will want to rejoice in that.

Mr. Viggers : Does my right hon. Friend agree that cultural and political links with Japan have never been stronger, and nor have our trade links? Does he agree that Japan has consistently placed more than 40 per cent. of its investment in the European union in the United Kingdom--and an even higher proportion in the United Kingdom financial sector? In his forthcoming visit to Japan, however, will my right hon. Friend urge on that country the fact that there are a number of invisible barriers to trade which, if removed or reduced, would enable us to improve our exports to the Japanese and thus help them to reduce their trade surplus?

Mr. Goodlad : Yes, indeed. As my hon. Friend knows--in his present capacity he makes a great contribution to our relations with Japan and is very knowledgeable about it--Japan has removed most barriers to trade in recent years, although there are still problems in some areas. The Prime Minister raised those matters during his recent visit and I shall do the same in my forthcoming one.

The Prime Minister of Japan described my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister's visit as the beginning of a new era for British-Japanese relations, which he saw as the linchpin of Japan's relations with Europe. We will continue to seek to enhance that relationship and not, as some others do, to undermine it.

Ms Ann Coffey (Stockport) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker : Order. We take points of order after statements.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page