House of Commons
Tuesday 20 June 2000
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
City of Newcastle upon Tyne Bill [Lords] (By Order)
To be read the Third time on Tuesday 27 June.
Greenham and Crookham Commons Bill (By Order)
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Tuesday 27 June.
Oral Answers to Questions
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
The Secretary of State was asked--
Central Southern Africa
1. Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield): When he next plans to meet leaders of central southern African countries; and if he will make a statement. [125204]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Peter Hain): My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in Feira attending an important meeting of the European Council and has asked for his apologies to be given to the House.
Tonight, I will be flying to South Africa to attend a meeting of the World Economic Forum in Durban, where I expect to meet leaders from other central and southern African countries. I visited Zambia in May. I will visit Mauritius on the way home and Angola in early July.
Mr. Winterton: I fully accept the reason why the Foreign Secretary is not able to be here and am delighted to learn that the Minister of State is flying to South Africa later today. What discussions has he had with states in central southern Africa about the desperate situation in Zimbabwe and about the presidential elections in particular, which are imminent? What views have the central southern African states put forward? Does he agree that it is essential that the Opposition party in Zimbabwe, the Movement for Democratic Change, has an opportunity for free and fair elections?
Does the Minister further agree that the only way in which that wonderful country, which has such tremendous potential, can make progress is if all the peoples who comprise the population of Zimbabwe--black, white and
others--can work together to ensure a prosperous future for the country? People are desperately concerned about the elections. Can we have an assurance that they will be free and fair?
Mr. Hain: I agree with all the hon. Gentleman's points and acknowledge his long-standing interest in the region. We have had detailed discussions with all the African leaders, who share our concerns about the desperate situation in Zimbabwe.
The whole world has been appalled by the violence and terror unleashed by the Government of Zimbabwe. Britain has repeatedly urged that the people of Zimbabwe have the right to make their choice freely and fairly, but we will not pre-empt the verdict of international observers. Indeed, the leader of the Opposition there has said that to do so would be irresponsible. Only President Mugabe can end the intimidation by instructing those responsible for it. He owes it to his country to ensure that the election results reflect the wishes of the people of Zimbabwe.
Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley): Although clearly we cannot pre-determine what the election monitors will be able to say about the elections in Zimbabwe, is my hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient observers have been allowed to go to Zimbabwe to look at the parliamentary elections this weekend, and that a full report will be able to be made available in the House and throughout the country as soon as those elections have been held?
Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend raises an important point, which is crucial to the fairness and freeness of the elections--the presence of observers from foreign countries. There are now more than 300; we would have liked more. Obstructions are still being put in their way. It is still not clear whether the 20,000-plus internal monitors will be able to get access to the polling stations, to inspect the registers and to carry out their duties. All those matters will need to be followed carefully and closely; indeed, we are doing that.
Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife): Does the Minister agree that we should not be surprised about allegations of obstruction and intimidation in relation to the monitors? Indeed, the surprise would be if there were no such allegations in the light of the events of the past few months.
Is it not the case that those of us who are concerned about the future of Zimbabwe have to put our trust in the courage and determination of the people of that country to choose their own Government? Finally, if ZANU-PF were to win the election, how could Zimbabwe remain a member of the Commonwealth? What price the Harare declaration if the Government in Harare simply ignore it?
Mr. Hain: The right hon. and learned Gentleman makes an important case. I agree with much, if not all, of it. It is vital, first, that the people of Zimbabwe are able to determine their own destiny in choosing whichever party they vote for; and, secondly, that the policies adopted after the elections by whatever Government take
office take the country forward, rather than continue to send it down the drain, as unfortunately has been happening in recent times.
Mr. Tony Lloyd (Manchester, Central): In the light of the previous question, does my hon. Friend agree that, if President Mugabe, in defiance of democracy, continues to allow his supporters to act in a way that subverts the democratic process and, at the end of the elections, ignores the results given by a people who will speak for themselves--the outcome is not for us to determine--the Commonwealth will have to send a strong signal throughout the Commonwealth and, in particular, to democrats in Zimbabwe?
Mr. Hain: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say, as the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell) mentioned, that the Commonwealth has taken a close interest in Zimbabwe's future. The Harare declaration is very clear on all those matters. The Commonwealth ministerial action group, having considered the crisis in Zimbabwe, will no doubt have to consider what happens after the elections. We await the outcome of the elections to determine what the Commonwealth should or should not do.
Mr. Francis Maude (Horsham): Is it not already transparently clear that the elections cannot be free and fair, and that the only way in which ZANU can win them is through the wholesale rigging, gerrymandering and intimidation that we have already seen? The only light in this dark period of that young country's life has been the raw bravery and undimmed determination of those Zimbabweans, both in the MDC and more widely, who simply refuse to see their country stolen from them.
Is not the overwhelming need now for the international community to make it clear that if Mr. Mugabe insists in clinging to a position that he has now defiled, he will become an international pariah, unwelcome to travel abroad; his regime, as the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell) said, suspended from the Commonwealth; aid to his regime stopped; and his own stolen overseas assets seized? Would not anything less be a betrayal of those very brave people who are fighting for their country?
Mr. Hain: I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the situation in recent months has been extremely serious, and I acknowledge the fact that, some months ago, he visited the country to see that for himself. It is very important that, with the elections only days away, we choose our words very carefully, and that, as he said, the people of Zimbabwe have the courage and determination to go to polling stations and choose whom they want to vote for, freely and fairly. We support them in their right to choose their own Government without intimidation, without violence and without the terror and all the other things that have occurred in the past few months and made the situation so desperate for that country.
Sri Lanka
2. Mr. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire): If he will make a statement on the conflict in Sri Lanka. [125205]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Peter Hain): We are deeply concerned about the tragic situation in Sri Lanka, particularly the events in the Jaffna peninsula, and the danger to the civilian population. We call upon the Sri Lankan Government and the LTTE to cease hostilities and begin negotiations immediately. We fully support Norway's efforts to facilitate peace talks.
Mr. Taylor: But, as a power with some historic responsibility and influence in that region, are we doing enough? Tens of thousands of Tamils and Sinhalese have been slaughtered with European weapons. Does the Minister agree that the controls on the munitions merchants who are dealing death in Sri Lanka are woefully weak? Should there not be an international arms embargo to prevent that tragic conflict turning into a bloodbath? Is that not an ethical foreign policy?
Mr. Hain: I understand the point that my hon. Friend is making. The bloodshed and violence are appalling, and they are fuelled by the arms coming into the country. Of course, Sri Lanka has an elected Government who have a right to defend themselves. We shall review our own policy on arms exports, as we are doing, case by case, to determine whether it complies with our very clear criteria that those exports should not be used for either international oppression or external aggression.
The real priority, however, is to begin negotiations between the Government and the opposition LTTE. We are working tirelessly--with the Norwegians, with the Indians and with others--to achieve that, and we shall continue to do so.
Finally, Madam Speaker, may I acknowledge your own close interest in the island, which is much appreciated by the people of Sri Lanka?
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): What assessment has the Minister of State made of the alleged link between the International Federation of Tamils, in the United Kingdom, and the so-called Liberation Tigers, in Sri Lanka?
Mr. Hain: We are aware of the activities of various representatives of the rebels in Sri Lanka, and of course we take a close interest in those activities to ensure that they conform with British law. We shall continue to monitor the situation.
Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton): As the Minister has already mentioned, Norway and the United States are playing a role in trying to facilitate talks between the two sides in the conflict. What more can the Government do to end 17 years of civil war in Sri Lanka, which is estimated to have resulted in more than 70,000 deaths, and help to ensure that that country is now on the road to peace?
Mr. Hain: It is one of the unresolved regional conflicts that must now have the world's immediate attention to achieve the engagement necessary to promote negotiations and, ultimately, a lasting peace. My view is that the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka must be respected, but so must the rights of the Tamil community. Some form of autonomy, in the form of devolved government and perhaps with greater powers than have
been proposed by the President and her Government so far, may be the way forward. Meaningful negotiations should be instituted immediately following a cessation of hostilities to achieve that objective.
Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset): Does the Minister agree that the vast majority of Tamils live with the Sinhalese in the south of the country, and the solution that he has just suggested is therefore rather strange? Does he agree that one cannot be evenhanded in a situation in which the Government of Sri Lanka have constantly offered deals to people in the north and called ceasefires, only to have them broken by suicide bombings? It is difficult for the British simply to say, "Let's be evenhanded between the two sides."
Mr. Hain: It is not a question of being evenhanded. The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point about the elected Government in Sri Lanka, and we respect them and have an excellent relationship with them. However, with many such problems, as we have seen on our doorstep in Northern Ireland, in the end one needs to pursue negotiations and achieve compromises to promote an ultimate peace. It is not for Britain to specify what that peace settlement would look like, nor to specify any form of devolution or autonomy that might result, and I was not doing so.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |