| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Roger Casale (Wimbledon): I join hon. Members in welcoming the restoration of diplomatic links with Libya. On behalf of the British-Italian parliamentary group, of which I am chairman, I join the Foreign Secretary in paying tribute to the work of the Italian Government in protecting British interests in the intervening years. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the forthcoming British-Italian summit offers a good opportunity for our Government to renew their commitment and support for Italian initiatives within the
common foreign and security procedures and other mechanisms to create an area of freedom, security and justice across the Mediterranean?
Mr. Cook: My hon. Friend draws attention to whatI believe is a new development in our relations, the British-Italian summit, which we will be hosting in Britain shortly. It will give us an unprecedented opportunity to take forward a number of the wider European issues.
I take this opportunity to echo the appreciation that my hon. Friend has given to the Italian Government for acting as our protecting power. In fairness to the Government of Italy, I do not think that they understood at the time how long that commitment might last, but, throughout those 15 years, they have never resiled from their commitment to act as our partner and friend within Libya. My friend and colleague, Lamberto Dini, was also helpful in interceding with Libya in part of the negotiations over the Lockerbie trial. I have written to him this week giving him advance notice of this statement and thanking him for all the help that Italy has given us over the years.
Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham):
The right hon. Gentleman has told us that the Libyan Government will co-operate with the investigation and abide by the outcome. It would be helpful if he could tell the House what is meant by that. Are potential witnesses to be questioned by officers of the Metropolitan constabulary? Are potential witnesses to come to the United Kingdom for that purpose or are officers of the Metropolitan force to go to Libya? If there is a prima facie case against one or more individuals, will they, if necessary, waive diplomatic immunity and submit themselves for trial in the United Kingdom courts?
The House will know that the Libyan Government provided large quantities of arms to the IRA. Will the Foreign Secretary tell the House whether the Libyan Government are proposing to set up a fund to compensate the families of those murdered by those arms?
Mr. Cook:
I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his questions. I remind him that Libya's support for the IRA was dealt with by the Government of whom he was a member in 1995. That Government then said that they were generally satisfied with Libya's response and the information it had provided on previous links with the IRA. That Government regarded the matter as closed and I do not have a basis on which to seek to reopen it.
On diplomatic immunity, if I recall correctly, in 1984 the previous Government contested the right of those in the bureau at the time to demand diplomatic immunity and we would not seek to change such a view. The investigation is a matter squarely within the hands of the Metropolitan police. I can only tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman and the House that they have fully supported this statement and will be making their own statement of welcome today. Of course, a commitment to co-operate with the investigation must, by definition, mean making witnesses available for interview. I hope that that will take place. If it does not, we will remind the Libyan Government of their commitment.
Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington):
I think that we should readily seize this window of opportunity to redevelop the historic relationship that we had with Libya before these recent difficult times. In that light, may I take my right hon. Friend back to the issue of the Inter-Parliamentary Union? Is he prepared personally to raise with the executive of the IPU the need to bring in a delegation of parliamentarians from Libya, so that they can mix with those here and recognise that, here in this Parliament, there are friends of Libya who want to put all these matters behind us as soon as possible?
Mr. Cook:
I absolutely concur with my hon. Friend. If we are to have successful diplomatic relations it is important that they do not consist merely of Government- to-Government contacts, but include contacts between our peoples, our cultures and our Parliaments. I am well aware from my experience in several countries around the world that contact between parliamentarians is an extremely useful parallel to my discussions with Ministers.
Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South):
I join in congratulating the Foreign Secretary on the report, especially on the reference to co-operation in dealing with terrorism. As one who understands how a family feels when a serving member of a police service suffers and is killed, my sympathy goes out to the Fletcher family, and I am delighted that that chapter is closing.
However, in his response to the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg), the right hon. Gentleman said that the previous Government had accepted Libya's earlier explanations about Semtex. I ask that that issue be kept open and that contacts continue to be made. It may be that we shall all have to face again the use of Semtex, either on the mainland or in Northern Ireland, so it would be helpful to know about sources and movers, so that they might be brought to justice.
Mr. Cook:
If an occasion arises when it would be useful to seek information from the Government of Libya in that context, we would certainly do so. After today's statement and with the resumption of direct representation in Tripoli, we are better placed to do so. The previous Government noted that there were some omissions from the information provided in 1995, although it was generally satisfactory. I agree that, if further information can be useful in our fight against terrorism, it is open to us to go to the Libyans and seek their assistance.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield):
As a Back Bencher who has followed the difficulties between this country and Libya over many years, I congratulate the Foreign Secretary most warmly on his statement to the House this afternoon. I believe that objectives that are satisfactory to all the parties involved have been achieved, which might indicate that Libya is once again re-entering the civilised world.
Will the Foreign Secretary answer this direct question, which is of the utmost importance: does he believe that the agreement with Libya delivers a kick in the teeth or a blow to international terrorism, and that it may deprive international terrorism of supplies of weapons, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Belfast, South
(Rev. Martin Smyth)? Would not such a blow to international terrorism be to the benefit of the world as whole?
Mr. Cook:
The hon. Gentleman echoes a point put to me earlier by my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman), which is that the more we embrace countries in the fight against terrorism, the more we isolate those countries that are prepared to support terrorism. One of the issues that have brought Libya to the present agreement is that it has become conscious that it, too, can be a victim of terrorism, and that it is in the interests of all of us to fight terrorism together with equal determination.
I have been informed that the Metropolitan police investigation will initially be carried out through written commission interrogatories. Those will include requests for written witness statements.
Mr. Peter Bottomley (Worthing, West):
I join in welcoming what the Foreign Secretary and his colleagues have achieved. Those who have kept the flowers at Yvonne Fletcher's memorial in St. James's square will understand the various considerations and the progress that have made his statement possible. Doubt remains in respect of diplomatic immunity: we do not believe that the people in the Libyan People's Bureau had it, but, if it is claimed, can it be waived by the individual who is charged, or can it be waived only by a Government?
On a broader point, does the Foreign Secretary understand that Governments and people opposed to Governments or people with political causes will continue to believe that London is a place where they can get publicity and public attention by committing the sort of violence that we witnessed at the Iranian embassy, the Libyan People's Bureau, the Israeli embassy and elsewhere? Will he confirm the continuing promise of British Governments that there will be an intensity and a persistence in pursuing those who use London as one of the world's killing fields so that people will not expect to get away with it?
Mr. Cook:
I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that the Government will do everything possible to combat terrorism here and abroad. Britain has had too sad and too much experience of terrorism at first hand not to understand the importance to other Governments of our assisting them wherever it is possible to do so within the law in their fight against terrorism. I fully agree with the hon. Gentleman on that point.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |