House of Commons Hansard Debates for 3 May 1995

Mr. Hurd: Of course, and that is what we are building. We are building that policy not on the basis of qualified majority voting, but step by step and area by area. We have already taken a number of joint actions on the basis of that article of the treaty and I hope that we shall continue to take more. As has been said, we take action when we agree. This policy should be built from the bottom up, brick by brick.

Mr. Churchill: Bearing in mind the fact that British forces and their allies in UNPROFOR serving in Bosnia

Column 317

are not there in sufficient strength or with adequate equipment to remain in circumstances of all-out civil war, is it not of the essence that we retain the closest links with the United States, whose role would be crucial in arranging for any safe extraction of allied forces from the former Yugoslavia?

Mr. Hurd: My hon. Friend is quite right in his analysis, and we do so.

Mr. Menzies Campbell: In a period of reduced defence expenditure throughout Europe, will not the provisions of the Maastricht treaty in relation to

"a common foreign and security policy"

be underlined and encouraged by economic pressures, such as inter- operability, common procurement and forced specialisation?

Mr. Hurd: I did not entirely follow the hon. and learned Gentleman, possibly because his question is more appropriately addressed to Defence Ministers, but if I find something useful about which to write to him on this subject, I shall do so.

Land Mines

12. Mr. Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has held with his EC counterparts on formulating a common policy regarding the export of land mines. [20429]

Mr. David Davis: As my hon. Friend will have heard me say already, on 10 April the Foreign Affairs Council agreed a proposal for joint action on land mines. The joint action includes a European Union-wide moratorium on the export of anti-personnel land mines--identical in scope to our own moratorium--joint efforts to strengthen the UN weaponry convention, and support for demining.

Mr. Hendry: I thank my hon. Friend for that clear answer. The House will welcome the fact that Britain has taken the lead in that matter and that other Governments in the European Union are now following it. In view of serious concern around the country about the export of land mines and in the light of a misleading recent television documentary, will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to tell the House exactly what the moratorium covers and why?

Mr. Davis: My hon. Friend is right about the misleading information. I originally announced our national moratorium on the export of anti- personnel land mines in July 1994. On 15 March, I extended its scope and it now comprises a total ban on the export of non self-destructing or non- detectable anti-personnel land mines, because those are the most dangerous to civilians, plus a ban on the export of all anti-personnel land mines to countries which have not ratified the weaponry convention.

Intergovernmental Conference

13. Mr. Dykes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to hold discussions with members of the EU reflections group on future IGC priorities for 1996. [20430]

Column 318

Mr. David Davis: The first meeting of the study group is on 2 June in Messina.

Mr. Dykes: I wish my hon. Friend well in those discussions, as he is our participant. The two Members of the European Parliament who came before the Select Committee on European Legislation last week for the hearing repeated, with emphasis, that deepening--

Mr. Skinner: Another word for federalism.

Mr. Dykes: --was very important and would be a leading feature of the discussions--they anticipated that, anyway. I do not know whether the reverse is true, since they also said that that would mean the increasing use of majority voting. Can we show some enthusiasm for that and try to keep up with them?

Mr. Davis: It is always a nice feeling to know that my hon. Friend is behind me on these matters. No, I cannot agree with him about the views expressed by the two Members of the European Parliament who came to speak to hon. Members last week. Oddly, I find myself agreeing with the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) that deepening, to some extent, is a synonym for federalism and, as such, we shall not be supporting it.

Mr. Barnes: Will the reflections group be reflecting on the means of overcoming the democratic deficit, such as increasing the powers of the European Parliament and controlling those of the Council of Ministers? All Parliaments could do with taking powers away from their Ministers.

Mr. Davis: I do not agree with that last comment. The democratic deficit, as it is described, is interpreted in many different ways. We take the view that the most important action that can be taken is that already outlined by the Prime Minister at Leiden; to try to bring the national Parliaments into a bigger role in the European Union.

Mr. Wilkinson: Can my hon. Friend reflect on the tremendous wave of support which would rise up throughout the country were Her Majesty's Government's representative at the reflections group to press for the recovery of powers and competencies to this Parliament and to this Government, which we ought never to have lost to Brussels? Above all, can he seek through the reflections group the recovery of the primacy of British law over European law?

Mr. Davis: What I can say to my hon. Friend is that I am sure that all aspects of the European Union will be discussed at great length in the reflection group. Matters such as the balance of powers between national Governments and the Union will be discussed.

Angola

15. Mr. Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the timetable for the deployment of the full UN peacekeeping force in Angola. [20432]

Mr. Baldry: The British logistic battalion began to arrive in Angola on 16 April. With our assistance, the main United Nations Angola Verification Mission force is due to deploy as from next week.

Mr. Bayley: I welcome that answer. The Minister will be aware that the Secretary-General has said that the

Column 319

infantry contingent of the peacekeeping force will be deployed in stages. Will the Minister assure the House that we will press for it to be deployed quickly so that the Lusaka protocol arrangements do not unwind? Does he agree that the peacekeeping process needs to be underpinned by a reconstruction programme? Who will be representing the British Government? Will we be represented at the highest level at the conference in Geneva in two months' time to discuss the reconstruction programme? Will the British overseas aid programme contribute to the reconstruction programme in Angola?

Mr. Baldry: The whole purpose of having a 600-strong United Kingdom logistics battalion is to help the deployment of the infantry as speedily as possible. Our men there, and the excellent job that they are doing, are much appreciated and valued. Of course the hon. Gentleman is right to state that the process must be underpinned by reconstruction. That is why we have allocated more than £24 million of emergency assistance from the overseas development budget to Angola since the UN appeal in June 1993. Angola is now the last remaining country in southern Africa to be brought back into democracy. We obviously trust that the UN operation will help to restore peace and to bring about reconciliation there.

Eritrea

16. Mr. Battle: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on United Kingdom relations with Eritrea. [20433]

Mr. Baldry: Our relations with Eritrea are good. We have followed closely developments since independence and have urged the Eritrean authorities to continue to work towards the adoption of a democratic constitution.

Mr. Battle: After 30 years of war, Eritrea became independent about two years ago. That was a moment of great liberation and hope, not least for the half a million refugees in Sudan. Since independence, some 80,000 of them have been rehabilitated and have returned. What can the Minister do to help the other 480,000 who cannot return because of the shortage of funds to help them to be rehabilitated and reintegrated into Eritrea? Would not one practical step be for the Government to reverse their 30 per cent. cut in British contributions to the European development fund which helps Lome countries, of which Eritrea is the latest member?

Mr. Baldry: As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have a substantial aid programme. At £2.2 billion, it is the sixth largest aid programme in the world. We also have a very substantial bilateral aid programme. Every £1 that we spend multilaterally is £1 that we cannot spend bilaterally. The way in which we spend our bilateral funds is extremely worth while. For example, it enabled us last year to spend £100,000 specifically on improving port facilities in Eritrea to enable Eritrean ports to cope better with the high 1994 food import requirements. We spent £6 million of our bilateral aid programme on general and specific aid for Eritrea last year, which Eritrea very much appreciated. If that money were to be spent on multilateral projects, it would not be available for us to spend, as we would wish to, bilaterally. I am sure that the House would wish that money to be spent well bilaterally--as indeed it is.

Mr. Harry Greenway: Does my hon. Friend estimate that the flow of Somali refugees to Eritrea, or to other

Column 320

parts of the world, has slowed down or finished as a result of the more peaceful situation in Somalia or is the reverse the case?

Mr. Baldry: Eritrea has had difficulties with Somali refugees and with Eritrean refugees in Sudan. We are ready to help with the process of returning Eritrean refugees from Sudan. I am glad to say that I think that the situation with Somalia has now stabilised.

United Nations

17. Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the total annual contribution of the United Kingdom to the United Nations; and what assessment he has made of the return received on that

investment. [20434]

Mr. Goodlad: In the UN financial year 1994, we contributed £305 million to the United Nations system. We are satisfied that our financial commitments to the UN are justified by the importance of its role across the entire range of international activity.

Mr. Winterton: Does my right hon. Friend agree that £305 million is a substantial sum of taxpayers' money? Will he advise the House how that sum is allocated to the different United Nations budgets? Will he assure the House that the energy and determination that the Government have shown in reducing bureaucracy and inefficiency in the United Kingdom and within the European Union will be matched by their determination to ensure that that large sum of money is spent effectively by the United Nations not only in our interests but in the interests of the world as a whole?

Mr. Goodlad: Yes. The breakdown of the United Kingdom's total contribution of £305 million is £34.8 million as the assessed contribution to the United Nations regular budget, £129.8 million as the assessed contributions to the United Nations peacekeeping budgets, £52.2 million as the assessed contributions to the United Nations specialised agencies, and £88.2 million as voluntary contributions to various UN programmes and activities that we support. Additionally, we spent £120 million in the United Kingdom financial year 1994-95 in respect of British participation in UN peacekeeping operations, of which £50 million has been reimbursed.

We have supported efforts at the United Nations to root out and eliminate fraud and waste. These include the establishment in September last year of the office of internal oversight services, which was mandated specifically to look into that matter. We shall continue to make every effort to ensure, as my hon. Friend rightly says, that those moneys are well spent.

Mr. Gunnell: Does the Minister agree that £305 million, in terms of the overall Government Budget or even the budget of his Department, is a relatively modest sum, given the role of the United Nations? What have the Government done to support current UN work and work by UN agencies in Rwanda? What are the Government able to do or to support to prevent a further outbreak of the dreadful killings that we saw in that area recently?

Mr. Goodlad: The hon. Gentleman describes £305 million as a modest amount in the context of my Department's budget. As he will know, my Department's budget is about £1.2 billion, including the cost of the

Column 321

World Service of the BBC and the British Council. That is quite a substantial sum of money. My hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) is quite right; it must be well spent. We have made our contribution in Rwanda, and I hope that, in due course, our contribution will lead to a rather happier future for that country.

Cyprus

18. Dr. Goodson-Wickes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in relation to the application of Cyprus to join the European Union. [20436]

Mr. David Davis: The 6 March Foreign Affairs Council outlined the circumstances in which negotiations with Cyprus will start six months after the intergovernmental conference.

Dr. Goodson-Wickes: I do not wish to make a delicate situation more delicate, but does my hon. Friend see any scope in the present circumstances for putting on pressure in certain quarters to ensure that there is an equitable solution to the problem within Cyprus before any application to join the European Union is processed?

Mr. Davis: Like our partners in the European Union, we believe that the best sequence is for a settlement in Cyprus to be followed by accession, and we shall make every effort to achieve that. The Foreign Affairs Council agreed that accession should benefit both communities and promote a settlement. We support that, too.

Mr. John D. Taylor: As membership of the European Union by Cyprus is clearly in practice dependent upon an internal settlement, and as the recent presidential elections in northern Cyprus have resulted in the election of Mr. Denktash on the basis of a policy of support for the United Nations confidence-building measures, what representations will the Government now make to the President of Cyprus to obtain his support for the United Nations confidence-building measures?

Mr. Davis: As I have already said, we shall take every possible measure to advance the process. Of course, the confidence-building measures are a large part of that.

Mr. Lester: Does my hon. Friend agree that, although we all want to see Cyprus within the European Union, it would be a tremendous anomaly-- given that the basic principle of the EU is free trade between partners--to suggest that Cyprus should be admitted when the Cypriots do not even trade with one another?

Mr. Davis: My hon. Friend sees exactly why we consider the best sequence to be settlement of the problem, followed by accession.

South Africa

19. Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the frequency and subject matter of current Government contacts with the Government of South Africa. [20437]

Mr. Baldry: We maintain close and frequent contact with the Government of South Africa, at all levels and on a wide range of subjects.

Mr. Hughes: I congratulate the South African Government on their first year of democratic all-party

Column 322

government, and celebrate that. Will Her Majesty's Government make it clear, however, that the worst possible scenario during the next few years--while the new constitution is worked out--would involve the coalition parties not only not speaking to each other but reaching such difficulties in their internal relationships that we would risk the breaking up of South Africa as a result of the intransigence of either the Inkatha Freedom party or any of the coalition parties? That is now an increasing possibility.

Mr. Baldry: Clearly, the people of South Africa must make their democratic institutions work, and, clearly, there will be difficulties from time to time. We must trust the maturity of the elected representatives in South Africa, and their determination to make democracy work, to see them through occasional sticky patches in the first few years of democracy. By and large, the maturity that they have shown so far bodes well.

Mr. Rathbone: Will my hon. Friend remind the House of what the British Government are doing to help the various communities in South Africa build a team spirit and work together for the future of their country?

Mr. Baldry: We are devoting £100 million of development aid to South Africa--£60 million bilaterally, and £40 through the European Union. We are supporting education projects, small-enterprise business development and sport. On Monday, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister hosted an event at Downing street for an impressive range of United Kingdom companies and others, specifically to sponsor sport and sporting activities in South Africa. Across the board, we are supporting the new, emerging South Africa. We are the largest investor in new business and trade in the country, and we are determined for it to enter the 21st century as strong and self-confident nation.

Mr. Robert Hughes: The Government know full well that the development and sustaining of democracy in South Africa depends largely on the development of its economy, and that of neighbouring countries. Why, then, are they cutting their contribution to the European development fund by 30 per cent., thereby putting at risk the prospect of development in which the Minister says he believes?

Mr. Baldry: First, the hon. Gentleman clearly did not listen to my earlier answer. Secondly, he does not seem to appreciate that the Lome agreement does not cover South Africa. As I have said, we are giving £100 million in aid to South Africa, £60 million of which comes from our bilateral budget. If we devoted more aid to multilateral spending, by definition that would mean that less could be spent from our bilateral budget: less could be spent on countries such as South Africa. I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman and many of his hon. Friends completely misunderstand the way in which the Lome and EDF operate.

Nigeria

20. Mr. Ian Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures his Department is taking to persuade the military regime in Nigeria to hand over power to the elected President. [20438]

Column 323

Mr. Baldry: We condemned the annulment of the presidential elections of 12 June 1993 and the subsequent ousting of the civilian interim national Government. The measures against the military announced in 1993 by the European Union and the United States remain in force. We continue to consult closely with our partners and with a wide range of political contacts in Nigeria. We continue to urge the Nigerian military Government to implement an early and peaceful transition to civilian democratic rule.

Mr. Bruce: I thank my hon. Friend for his answer.I am sure that he will agree that Britain is a great friend of the Nigerian people, and that it would be wholly wrong for us to abandon them to their fate. The Nigerian military Government possess all the dictatorship features of military Governments. They had set up the presidential elections under rules approved by themselves, but they then annulled the result. What more can we do to press the Nigerian Government to allow the Nigerian people to have their elected President in office?

Mr. Baldry: Our position is clear and straightforward. We continue to be concerned by events in Nigeria, where

Column 324

there is an urgent need for progress towards accountable civilian government. We deplore all human rights abuses, which contradict the Nigerian Government's declared commitment to make early progress towards democracy. It is essential that all detainees are subject to due process, and are either charged or promptly released. My hon. Friend can be confident that we will spare no opportunity to press upon the Nigerians the need to have early elections to restore the democratic Government.

Ms Abbott: Does the Minister agree that Nigeria's population and wealth mean that internal stability in that country is essential to the future of the whole region? When will the British Government press the Nigerian Government to release Chief Abiola from prison--where his medical condition is deteriorating badly--and to endorse him as the democratically elected president?

Mr. Baldry: We have been pressing the Nigerian Government to do exactly that, and also to ensure that political detainees are either brought to trial or released speedily. We also want the speediest possible return to a democratic Government in Nigeria. I cannot believe that there are any differences among Members about the need to achieve that as speedily as possible.

Column 323

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page