| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
- Sitting suspended, pursuant to Standing Order No. 10 (Wednesday sittings), till half-past Two o'clock.
Oral Answers to Questions
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
Iraq
1. Lady Olga Maitland: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement regarding United Nations sanctions on Iraq. [30842]
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Malcolm Rifkind): Sanctions will stay in place until Iraq fulfils its obligations under the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Implementation of resolution 986 will give welcome relief to the Iraqi people, whose suffering Saddam has caused.
Lady Olga Maitland: Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that implementation of United Nations resolution 986 could be misinterpreted by the Iraqis as weakness? I mention that particularly in the light of the fact that, yesterday, United Nations inspectors were deliberately obstructed by the Iraqis when they went to visit a site in west Baghdad, where they believed that there were weapons of mass destruction, and the Iraqis are still holding more than 600 missing Kuwaitis and prisoners of war. One woman was released just a month ago, having been taken when she was only 14 years old. She is now a wreck. She had been raped and tortured. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that we must, with all diligence, press the Iraqis to comply with all United Nations resolutions before we give them any more assistance?
Mr. Rifkind: Yesterday's incident confirms, as my hon. Friend has shown, why it is necessary for general sanctions to remain against Iraq until it fully complies with United Nations resolutions, including resolutions with regard to those who have been unlawfully detained in Iraq since the end of the Gulf war. Resolution 986 was concerned purely with humanitarian matters, and it is because the United Kingdom and the United States were determined to ensure that no loopholes could be exploited by Saddam Hussein that the negotiations took a long time. I am pleased to say that there was a satisfactory result.
Mr. Dalyell: What about the 500,000 or more Iraqi children who have died in the past few years as a result of disease and malnutrition? What does the Foreign Office have to say about the reports of the most recent travellers to Iraq which confirm the appalling stagnation of water and waterborne diseases that occur there?
Mr. Rifkind: As the hon. Gentleman well knows, sanctions have never applied to food or medicines. Therefore, if aid has not reached people in Iraq, that must be entirely the responsibility of the Iraqi Government.
Mr. John Marshall: Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the Iraqi regime is one of the most evil--if not the most evil--regimes in the world? It ill behoves any hon. Member to give it any comfort when it has ignored the plight of its own people, the plight of the Kurds and the
plight of the Kuwaitis, and when it rained down Scud missiles on innocent Israelis in 1991. It is an evil regime and it should get no help from anyone in the House.
Mr. Rifkind: I strongly agree with my hon. Friend, whose views will be commended to the House as a whole.
EU Presidency
2. Mr. Jon Owen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next plans to meet the Irish Foreign Minister to discuss the priorities of the forthcoming Irish presidency of the European Union. [30843]
Mr. Rifkind: I expect to meet the Irish Foreign Minister on 17 June.
Mr. Jones: Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the priorities of the next six months for the European Union will be to ensure the success of elections in Bosnia? How, then, would it help Britain's campaign to lift the beef ban for us to block financial assistance for those elections? Is that not another reason why the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath), last night described the Government's policies on the beef ban as lamentable and why he called on the Government to rescind them?
Mr. Rifkind: The hon. Gentleman is just a little out of date. He is obviously unaware that we did not block the proposal for assistance for the Bosnian elections when it came up on Monday. The hon. Gentleman should do his homework before he asks questions.
Mr. Mark Robinson: Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is important to gear up for the forthcoming intergovernmental conference because the policy of non-co-operation will, we hope, not last for ever and because we shall at some stage resume normal business?
Mr. Rifkind: Yes, and even at this moment we are participating fully in the discussions within the intergovernmental conference. The concept of an empty chair was a French initiative, not a British one, and is not one that we have chosen to follow.
Mr. Menzies Campbell: Will the Secretary of State be surprised, when he meets his Irish counterpart, to find that his priority is to persuade the United Kingdom to abandon its policy of non-co-operation? What possible justification is there for this policy which aggravates our European partners and, so far, has produced nothing? The United Kingdom would not negotiate under duress. Why do we expect our European partners to do so?
Mr. Rifkind: The hon. and learned Gentleman may have heard the President of the European Commission say yesterday that he was now optimistic that there could be an agreement next week on a framework for the lifting, phase by phase, of the ban on British beef. No one was making that prediction a week or 10 days ago.
China
3. Mr. Pawsey: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action he is taking to strengthen the relationship between China and the United Kingdom. [30844]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Jeremy Hanley): We maintain an active programme of contacts with the Chinese at ministerial and official level. Most recently, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister made a highly successful visit to China and Hong Kong last month.
Mr. Pawsey: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is there any action that he could take to increase the resources and support available to Chinese students who come to the United Kingdom to study English at British universities? Does he accept that, if he were able to increase the resources, much would be done further to improve the relationship between China and the United Kingdom? I have little doubt that, if that were done, a substantial dividend would come back to the UK.
Mr. Hanley: My hon. Friend is absolutely right, in terms not only of Chinese students but of students the world over. An increasing number of students come to the United Kingdom both to learn English and to learn a broader curriculum. The money that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office spends on granting scholarships and encouraging exchanges is money well spent.
Mr. Llew Smith: What representations has the Minister made to the Chinese Government on the recent nuclear test and the adverse effect that that could have on the negotiations for a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty? What information has he received on the hijack of the Greenpeace ship which was on its way to protest about the tests?
Mr. Hanley: We have long said that we want an indefinite end to all testing. That is why we have been negotiating hard for the early conclusion of a comprehensive test ban treaty; that is our priority. China has said that it, too, is committed to these negotiations. We note that China has announced a moratorium to take effect after a final test in September and I hope that that means that the Chinese are keeping to their commitment. It is now for them to demonstrate their commitment by being prepared to conclude negotiations by the end of June and to sign the treaty, along with all other countries, in the autumn. We have absolutely no plans to resume testing. All other nuclear weapons states have now ceased testing and I hope that China will follow that example.
Mr. Waterson: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the biggest single contribution that the Chinese Government can make to Sino-British relations will be to ensure that the principle of two systems in one country is given effect when Hong Kong is handed back to China and to take steps to recognise the rule of law, free speech and free enterprise in that colony?
Mr. Hanley: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I cannot add to what he has said.
Hong Kong
4. Mrs. Bridget Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals the Government have for ensuring that elected members of Hong Kong's Legislative Council are able to continue as members of the proposed provisional legislature. [30845]
Mr. Rifkind: The members of Hong Kong's Legislative Council were properly elected in free and open elections in September 1995 which were fully consistent with the joint declaration and the Basic Law. It is for China to justify any decision to dissolve the present Legislative Council and to establish a provisional legislature, on which I have made the Government's position clear.
Mrs. Prentice: Can the Secretary of State give the House an assurance that the administrative arrangements that the Government have put in place will remain intact after July 1997?
Mr. Rifkind: We believe that is what ought to happen. After July 1997 we are no longer the sovereign power, but it would be against the interests of the people of Hong Kong--as they have clearly demonstrated--to interfere with the legislature that has been established.
Mr. Robin Cook: The Foreign Secretary will be aware that I recently visited Hong Kong. May I advise him that there is no issue that more affects confidence in the future of Hong Kong than the stated intention of China to replace the elected LegCo with an appointed LegCo? When the Prime Minister asked about that, he said that no options were ruled out for pressure on China. Can the Foreign Secretary tell us what those options might be and exactly how the Government plan to restore a through train for democracy in Hong Kong?
Mr. Rifkind: It is important for China to appreciate that interest in the welfare of Hong Kong is not just to be found within the territory or within the United Kingdom. There is great international interest. I have discussed these matters with President Clinton and his colleagues in the United States. President Chirac of France and others have raised the question of Hong Kong with the Chinese authorities. Therefore, there will be great global interest in what happens and the Chinese Government will need to reassure the entire international community that the welfare of Hong Kong will be properly safeguarded. The best way to do that is, as the hon. Gentleman said, by confirming that the Legislative Council will be allowed to continue in its normal way.
Mr. Anthony Coombs: I welcome what my right hon. and learned Friend has just said. Does he agree that any attempt by China to make the Legislative Council appointed rather than democratically elected, as it is now, would make a mockery of any agreement that China would reach with the United Kingdom on two systems, one country after 1997? Is he aware of the strong feeling in the House as to how appalling that would be for the people of Hong Kong and will he ensure that the international pressure that he has just mentioned will be applied to China if that ever happens?
Mr. Rifkind: Yes. I agree with my hon. Friend. The Chinese have said that the appointed provisional
legislature would be replaced by an elected Legislative Council. Hong Kong already has an elected Legislative Council. Such a reform is neither necessary nor desired by the people of Hong Kong. Therefore, it would be far more sensible for the Chinese authorities to accept that it will be consistent with the stability and welfare of the territory.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |