| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): Having hadvarious Adjournment debates on the tragic death of WPC Fletcher, I pay tribute to the courage and dignity displayed throughout by Queenie Fletcher, her husband and family. May I clarify something that seems unclear? In his statement, the Foreign Secretary said that "general responsibility" had been accepted by the Libyans for the actions at the time--I think that those were his words. The Opposition spokesman talked in terms of Libyan guilt. Will my right hon. Friend clarify whether the Libyans have accepted guilt? As I understand it, the testimony that was given on film by Huw Thomas, formerly the surgeon in Belfast, by George Stiles, the senior ballistics expert of the British Army, and by Professor Bernard Knight, the Home Office pathologist, at least raises questions.
I pay tribute also to David Veness and his colleagues, whom I went to see in Scotland yard. I see the Home Secretary nodding. Indeed, I pay tribute to my right
hon. and hon. Friends in the Foreign and Home Offices for the seriousness with which they have tackled this issue. Could there be clarification on the issue of responsibility and exactly what the Libyans have accepted?
I should like to ask a final question of which I gave the Foreign Office notice once the statement went up on the Board. Are there likely to be, along the lines suggested by Professor Robert Black, the educational and cultural exchanges that are yearned for?
Mr. Cook:
When Mr. Obeidi called on me earlier today, he expressed voluntarily his appreciation of Britain's acceptance of a large number of studentsfrom Libya to study in Britain. Even under present circumstances, 500 students from Libya are attending full-time courses in Britain. I very much hope that, with the normalisation of diplomatic relations, we will be able to intensify that base, which is already strong. I assure my hon. Friend that I should imagine that the new ambassador will want to give high priority to promoting cultural exchanges where appropriate.
My hon. Friend mainly focused on the question of guilt. Guilt is of course a particularly narrow term, which identifies the criminal responsibility of an individual or individuals. We are dealing with the acceptance of responsibility by a whole Government for the action of their agents. In that sense, the statement that I have placed in the Library, which hon. Members may examine, is quite explicit. Libya acknowledges the verdict of the coroner's court that the bullet was fired from within the Libyan People's Bureau, and accepts general responsibility for those who were in the bureau at the time. That is a satisfactory acceptance of responsibility. The issue of individual guilt is one for the police investigation.
Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park):
I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for allowing us to have sight of it before he announced it in the Commons. We of course welcome the resumption of diplomatic relations with Libya and the terms of the agreement. That is very good news. We send sympathy to WPC Fletcher's family for what must have been terrible times for them.
Although we accept that the negotiations must have been difficult and sensitive, does the right hon. Gentleman understand the desire of British business not to lose out on trade to its competitors? Does he realise the confusion that surrounded the trip to Libya organised by the British Libyan business group this week? Will he reaffirm that, now that the agreement has been reached, the Department of Trade and Industry and the Foreign Office will get their act together and give a clear signal and support to British companies?
Mr. Cook:
I am happy to agree with the hon. Lady on what she says in respect of the Fletcher family. They will appreciate that those in all quarters of the House have expressed sympathy and support for their conduct over the past 15 years and the trial that that must have been to them.
I say bluntly to the House that the Government have nothing to apologise for on the question of the British Libyan business group. The visit was proposed in May, when we had only commenced discussions on whether we
could reach a resolution of the matter of the killing of WPC Fletcher. It would have been quite wrong for the Government at that stage to encourage a parliamentary visit when we were still unable to get agreement from Libya on this question. Indeed, if we had done so, we would have been subject to much greater criticism in the House. There has been no confusion between the two Departments. Both Departments took that view in May and last week both decided that the time had come to relax it.
One consequence of that outcome is that we shall be better placed to support trade missions and our commercial interests. That is not why we sought the agreement. We sought it to do justice to the memory of Yvonne Fletcher. We sought an agreement on the Lockerbie bombing to take the course of justice forward. However, we should not regret the fact that one consequence of the agreements is that we shall be able to compete on equal terms with our trading partners in Libya.
Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that when I was shadow Home Secretary it was my responsibility to attend the siege of St. James's square, when a leafy part of central London was turned into a killing field, and that I later represented our party at the unveiling of a memorial to WPC Fletcher there? Is he further aware that when I was shadow Foreign Secretary it was intimated to me that if I were to travel to Libya, compensation for WPC Fletcher would be handed over to me, but I decided that it would not be acceptable to do that because we did not have diplomatic relations with Libya and because a behind-the-door approach to dealing with the problem would not entail Libya accepting responsibility, which it has now done? While we shall continue to mourn for WPC Fletcher, we have now seen a country that was outside the rule of international law voluntarily return within the rule of international law. Other countries, including Iraq, should pay attention to that.
Mr. Cook:
I am well aware of the part that my right hon. Friend played at the time. This morning I re-read his observations in the House of Commons at the time of the original statement. I am also well aware of the monument to which he refers, as it is within walking distance of my official residence and I have passed it many times. We should all recognise that we would not do justice to the memory of Yvonne Fletcher by allowing the matter to continue in abeyance without attempting to find a way of resolving it and taking it forward. The agreement that we have secured today is a good way of trying to establish the truth and making sure that, in honour of Yvonne Fletcher and the pain of her family, we can take forward our relations with Libya. I agree with my right hon. Friend that there is a message in what has happened. Even Governments who have put themselves outside the circle of acceptable international relations can be brought back in. The more we succeed in doing that, the more we shall be able to offer security to people around the world.
Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East):
Does the Secretary of State agree that an apology is not a new development? Many years ago, shortly after the tragic death of Yvonne Fletcher, the Libyans offered a personal apology, accepting responsibility and offering a
I greatly appreciate the initiative that the Foreign Secretary has taken, as compared with what has happened in the past. Will he take every possible step to ensure that the agreed rules and safeguards in the trial at The Hague are carefully observed, particularly in view of the reports of one or two incidents over the past few days? Will he do all in his power to make sure that the safeguards that he offered are applied?
Mr. Cook:
I assure the House that, as well as the Foreign Secretary, there will be a number of Scottish trial judges present who will certainly wish to insist on proper rules of procedure. I have every confidence in their doing so. On the custody of the two accused, I gently say to the House, without divulging the details, that the reported breach of security was of a minor and technical character. I remain confident of the security arrangements that we have prepared at Camp Zeist.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |