| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
- It being half-past Eleven o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put, pursuant to Order [20 November].
Oral Answers to Questions
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
Gibraltar
1. Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last visited Gibraltar to discuss United Kingdom-Gibraltar relations. [850]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. David Davis): I visited Gibraltar on 7 and 8 November this year and had a range of discussions with Gibraltarians.
Mr. Garnier: I congratulate my hon. Friend on his recent visit to Gibraltar which was, by all accounts, a most successful visit. Is my hon. Friend aware that drug smuggling and tobacco smuggling through Gibraltar have decreased drastically over the past six months? Can my hon. Friend give any reasons for the dramatic fall in those illegal trades?
Mr. Davis: I thank my hon. and learned Friend for his flattering commendations. The reason for the fall in those trades is that Government action has closed them down. One of the most notable outcomes of my visit to Gibraltar was hearing about the fact that 8,000 Gibraltarians turned out on the streets of Gibraltar to support the Government's action in closing down those criminal activities. In my judgment, that shows very strong support for the Government's actions in a community of just 30,000 people.
Dr. Marek: Will the Minister give an absolute assurance that Gibraltar is within the European Union and that, for every circumstance, the boundary of the European Union runs around Europa point and not across La Linea?
Mr. Davis: The hon. Gentleman is quite right. Gibraltar is within the European Union, but of course for some purposes, particularly free movement of goods, it falls outside the customs boundary. I think that is the point that the hon. Gentleman is seeking to make.
Mr. John D. Taylor: In view of the improvement that the Minister has stated in relation to criminal activity in Gibraltar, what progress has been made in easing access between Spain and Gibraltar?
Mr. Davis: Some progress has been made. Over the few weeks after that reduction in criminal activity, there was a 70 per cent. increase in the throughput of people coming into Gibraltar across the border. That amounts to some 70,000 people coming into a community of some 30,000 and was a material improvement. We have maintained our pressure on the Spanish Government because the delays are still too long, and we wish them to improve further.
Nigeria
2. Mr. Mark Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of Nigeria concerning human rights in that country. [851]
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Malcolm Rifkind): We support the unprecedented decision of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Auckland to suspend Nigeria's membership. We also agreed with our European Union partners on 20 November a range of additional measures to mark our concern.
Mr. Robinson: The abuse of human rights in Nigeria has gone on far too long. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree with me that the Harare declaration, which the Prime Minister pioneered two years ago, has been most important in bringing the Commonwealth states together in their condemnation of the regime in Nigeria?
Mr. Rifkind: My hon. Friend is correct. The Harare declaration was important in itself. However, the suspension of Nigeria for human rights reasons emphasises that the declaration was not simply a form of rhetoric but that it led to significant action.
Mr. Robin Cook: Can the Secretary of State confirm that, in June this year, the Government gave a licence for the export of CS gas and rubber bullets to Nigeria? If he feels unable to confirm any individual sale, can he at least confirm that such products can no longer be exported under the new terms of the arms embargo? Does he agree that the most comprehensive arms embargo would be to cut off the cash flow from oil to the Nigerian military? At Monday's meeting of the Council of Ministers, will he support the German and Swedish proposal for an examination of the impact of oil sanctions on the Nigerian Government?
Mr. Rifkind: On the hon. Gentleman's first point, I cannot comment on a specific licence application, but I can certainly confirm that, as a result of the total arms embargo now imposed, no weapons of any kind can be provided to the Nigerians so long as that embargo continues. We have not excluded the possibility of oil sanctions. It is important for the hon. Gentleman to remember that the major importer of Nigerian oil--40 or 50 per cent.--is the United States. It is therefore important to see whether there is a likelihood of unanimity for such an imposition in the Security Council. We have not ruled it out. It deserves further consideration.
Arms Exports (Iraq)
3. Mr. Ronnie Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government's policy on arms exports to Iraq. [853]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Jeremy Hanley): We comply with United Nations Security Council resolution 661, which prevents the sale to Iraq of any weapons or other military equipment. In 1984 we introduced guidelines forbidding the export of lethal equipment, which were much tougher than those of any other major defence exporters. After 1984 the UK accounted for less than 3 per cent. of Iraq's defence-related imports.
Mr. Campbell: Does the Minister agree that, now that Scott is due to report his findings, if any Ministers are found to be to blame for, or involved in, that gun run, they should resign?
Mr. Hanley: The hon. Gentleman is right. The United Kingdom's policy on arms exports to Iraq from 1984 to
1992 is being considered by Sir Richard Scott. We shall take careful note of any conclusions and recommendations in Sir Richard's report, but we have no intention of commenting on the report until it is published.EU Intergovernmental Conference
4. Mr. Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he intends to publish a White Paper outlining Her Majesty's Government's priorities for the 1996 intergovernmental conference of the European Union. [854]
Mr. Rifkind: This is still under consideration.
Mr. Betts: If there is to be no White Paper--we have had no guarantee today--will the Secretary of State explain how the House is to hold Ministers accountable until the negotiations begin? Is the Foreign Secretary effectively saying that he cannot produce a White Paper because to produce anything at all would split the Conservative party down the middle? Will not the interests of the British people and the House have to take second place to the interests of the fragile unity within the Conservative party?
Mr. Rifkind: The hon. Gentleman's comments are pretty absurd. Tomorrow, I shall give evidence to the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs precisely on the intergovernmental conference and our policy with regard to it. So there are many opportunities, which have been used in the past and will continue to be available, to ensure that the House is kept informed. We have not excluded the possibility of a White Paper, but I regard that as one of a number of ways of ensuring that the House is fully informed and able to contribute to our deliberations.
Mr. Fabricant: Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that, if he were to publish a White Paper, one thing that he would not say is that we would give up our regional, environmental, social and industrial privileges-- our veto? Does he agree that any thought of giving up our veto would have a damaging effect on jobs? Is he as amazed as I am that the Labour party is suggesting just that?
Mr. Rifkind: Labour Members are suggesting that, and have committed themselves to it. Curiously, however, the Leader of the Opposition omitted to mention that point in his speech to the Confederation of British Industry on the social chapter. If he wanted to win industry to the Labour party's point of view, he could at least have come clean about the Labour party's current policy, which would make the social chapter subject to qualified majority voting.
Mr. Robin Cook: Can the Foreign Secretary confirm that Britain is alone among the countries of Europe in resisting a common policy on racism as part of the revision of the treaty? We have the largest ethnic minority population in Europe. Why do the British Government oppose measures that would protect members of our ethnic minority population from discrimination when they travel in Europe? Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman not understand that, by opposing a European commitment against racism, the Government are opposing the interest of British residents and damaging Britain's standing among our European partners? Is that not just
another case in which the Government are sacrificing British interests and British influence to please the right wing of the Conservative party?
Mr. Rifkind: That simply is not true. As the hon. Gentleman well knows, this country has the most effective race relations legislation in western Europe. There is no qualification with regard to our commitment to eradicating racism in all its forms. The Home Secretary made it clear not that he was opposed to ensuring the eradication of racism but that this is a genuine and open discussion on the best way to achieve that objective.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |