| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Robert Hughes indicated assent.
Mr. Hogg: I see that the hon. Gentleman is nodding.
Mr. Patrick Nicholls (Teignbridge): Through no fault of his own, my right hon. and learned Friend is fast approaching a rock and a hard place. He must honour his obligations either to the European Union or to the people of this kingdom, but he cannot do both. In what way will he resolve the matter?
Mr. Hogg: I am not such a pessimist as my hon. Friend. Quota hopping seems clearly to derogate from the principle of national quotas. Almost every hon. Member
accepts that and, as it is a rational argument, there is a good chance that we shall get people outside the House to accept it also. We shall certainly do our utmost to achieve that highly desirable objective.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): Is it any wonder that the British people are full of cynicism about the Government and about politics generally when an issue such as this stares them in the face? We are an island nation, surrounded by fish--and anyone can get the fish, bar the British. Fishermen have been chucked on the scrap heap. Why does not the Minister face up to the only realistic thing that can be done, and tell those tinpot people in the Common Market that we shall withdraw from the CFP? There could be some debris floating in the wake of that decision--we should leave the Spanish and the rest to clean it up.
Mr. Hogg: The hon. Gentleman gets more eccentric with age. He has almost reached retirement age, and he should take his own advice and go as soon as possible.
As regards the hon. Gentleman's particular points,to start off with, he would like us to leave the common fisheries policy. I have already made the case for not doing so. In any event, there is a gulf, as there is between himself and no doubt many of the people in the Labour party, between him and those on the Labour Front Bench. They are riven top to bottom on the subject.
Mr. Barry Field (Isle of Wight):
I served on the Standing Committee that considered the 1988 Act. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it ill behoves the Liberal Democrats to lecture the Government today when they could hardly put in a full day's attendance on that Committee? Is not it a fact that we are no longer elected to the high court of Parliament? This House has been reduced to an annexe of Brussels, and it is a very sad day. It is frustrating our fishermen and the British people.
Mr. Hogg:
And that is why my hon. Friend supports so enthusiastically the policy position that I have just announced--that is, a desire and intent within the context of the IGC to renegotiate, if need be, the part of the treaty that would tackle the problem of quota hoppers.
Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington):
But is not all this insecurity in the industry and the failure of Parliament and the Government properly to deal with Spanish access completely undermining confidence in the industry? So much so, that constituents of mine who are trawler owners are told when they approach the banks that they are no longer prepared to lend because they have no confidence in the industry. Should not Ministers be trying to restore some of the banks' confidence, so that trawler owners can look into the future with some hope?
Mr. Hogg:
It is perfectly true that there is a great deal of anxiety in the fishing industry, but the essential reason is the fact that fish stocks are falling and there are too many vessels chasing what there is in the water. That is the essential problem, and until it can be addressed satisfactorily--it will be extremely difficult to do so and it will certainly involve multinational action of many kinds--the hon. Gentlemen's constituents and his constituents' bankers will be lacking confidence.
Sir Hector Monro (Dumfries):
I warmly welcome my right hon. and learned Friend's strong stand and efforts to
Mr. Hogg:
I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for the support that he has just given. There are few people in the House who know more about fisheries policy than my right hon. Friend, who had a responsibility for that function for many years when in the Scottish Office. I find his support particularly welcome.
Ms Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North):
Why will the Minister not agree that he is quoting selectively from Hansard? It is a question not just of the Second Reading debate on the Merchant Shipping Bill in 1988, but of the Committee stage of the Merchant Shipping (Registration Etc.) Bill in 1993, when Conservative members along with other members of the Committee pressed the Government to deal with the Factortame case. The Minister could have dealt with it then.
Mr. Hogg:
I am bound to say that that is whingeing and whining of a particularly ungracious kind. I know that the Labour party is on the hook on this matter. The Opposition want us to accept that they have been treating the matter seriously, yet there was not a word about it in their 1992 manifesto or in their 1994 Euro-manifesto.I refuse to take them seriously, because they are not serious people.
Mr. John Butcher (Coventry, South-West):
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that this is not one of those things that the Foreign Office should see as some technical matter requiring a bit of deft footwork, to overcome a temporary problem? This is one of those watershed moments. My right hon. and learned Friend and the Fisheries Minister started off like bulldogs. Let us all hope that neither the Foreign Office nor the Commission will convert them into poodles. If they become poodles, the fishermen and others may demand that they take a visit to the vets, with a rather nasty outcome. My right hon. and learned Friend should say no, no, and no again, because the more unpopular he becomes in Brussels, the more popular he and our Fisheries Minister will become in this country. He should recognise this moment for what it is and dare to be popular.
Mr. Hogg:
My hon. Friend is right that this is not an occasion for subtle or diplomatic approaches. That is probably why I and my hon. Friend the Minister of State have charge of this business; we shall not be guilty of either.
Mr. Nigel Spearing (Newham, South):
Does the Minister agree that the root cause of the problem is that the common fisheries policy, as negotiated in the early 1980s, was not subject to unanimity, and that the matter was not discussed in Committee or at any other stage during the passage of the European Communities Act 1972? Moreover, Ministers of the Crown deliberately and
Mr. Hogg:
If there was real substance in what the hon. Gentleman was saying, it is passing strange that the then Labour Prime Minister, Lord Wilson, did not put the matter on his renegotiation agenda.
Mr. Michael Stephen (Shoreham):
Is not the Factortame case yet another example of judges in the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights--and even our own judges--using their powers of interpretation to second-guess almost everything that the Government do? Is it not time for the House to send a clear message to the judges that the sovereign authority in this land is Parliament and no one else?
Mr. Hogg:
Speaking generally, the business of judges is to interpret treaties or Acts. It is not the business of judges, as a general proposition, to determine policy. Although the matter goes rather wide of the subject,I agree that where judges seek to determine policy rather than to interpret statute, they exceed the powers that the House expects them to discharge.
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall):
Is it not true that when an advocate resorts to bluster and insult, it usually means that he has a weak case? Will the Minister respond directly to a direct question: in relation to compensation, can he say directly whether the Cornish boats that were damaged in the so-called tuna war and claimed compensation from the Spanish authorities 18 months ago have or have not received full compensation?
Mr. Hogg:
That is a serious matter. I think that the hon. Gentleman refers to a claim for about £100,000.I raised it personally with the then Spanish Minister on several occasions. We have got an assurance that the Spanish Government will make a payment. I very much regret that we have not yet received it, although it was, of course, a socialist Government. Now that the socialist Government have been excluded from office, perhaps we shall receive rapid payment.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |