APPENDIX 7
Memorandum submitted by Joint Foreign
Affairs Committee, Gibraltar Socialist Labour Party and Liberal
Party
INTRODUCTION
The Gibraltar Socialist Labour Party and the Liberal
Party of Gibraltar submitted a detailed Memorandum to the House
of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee which was published in the
Fourth Report of the Committee on 8 June 1999. Having now read
the response to that report by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
and following the invitation to comments on that reply we are
pleased to enclose our views.
GENERAL COMMENT
The Labour and Liberal parties in Gibraltar
consider that the reply by the Foreign Office is weak, evasive
and contradictory. They are attempting to justify the unacceptable
manner in which they have handled the external affairs of Gibraltar.
Even in those areas where assurances are given to the people of
Gibraltar, it falls well short of what is required. The Gibraltarians
have been hearing soothing words for years, what is needed is
concrete action and judging by the views expressed by the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office this is unlikely to be forthcoming.
DETAILED RESPONSE
We will take issue point by point with the reply.
FCO Introduction—Point 3
The introduction welcomes "the reduction
of tension over Gibraltar" since the Prime Minister Tony
Blair met his Spanish counterpart in April 1999. This is not so.
In fact, what has occurred is almost the opposite and there has
in fact been an intensification of orchestrated attacks on Gibraltar
by Spain. As recently as 13 October, the Spanish government representative
in the province of Cadiz, Miguel Osuna, accused Gibraltar of drugs
smuggling and money laundering. Similar allegations were repeated
in the Spanish daily "El Pais" on Sunday 24 October,
where Gibraltar was accused of not co-operating with the Spanish
judicial establishment. The delays at the border continue unabated,
and Spain continues to under-mine Gibraltar's position in the
European Union through its questioning of our ability to have
separate competent authorities from the United Kingdom. Madrid
has already hinted that it may well veto the necessary changes
to EU legislation to allow Gibraltar to participate in European
Parliamentary elections. In these circumstances of continuous
harassment, it is nonsense for the Foreign Office to say that
tension has been reduced.
FCO Introduction—Point 4
This says that "The report highlights a
number of important issues which will preoccupy UK, Spain and
Gibraltar for the remainder of the year. UK participation in part
of the Schengen acquis, the question of Gibraltar's competent
authorities within the EU, the airport, constitutional reform,
and the development of Gibraltar's financial services sector are
prominent among them. In all of these areas the Government are
keen for constructive dialogue and co-operation."
The GSLP and Liberal Party would be grateful
for clarification of this statement. It could be read as implying
that the list of matters that will reoccupy UK, Spain and Gibraltar
somehow involve Spain as a direct participant. It is the view
of the opposition parties in Gibraltar that such issues are purely
bilateral, either between Gibraltar and the United Kingdom, or
between both and the European Union. We would be grateful if the
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee sought and obtained
clarification of this point.
ECO—Point 22
It is regrettable that the Foreign Office do
not see the need to move away from or abolish the Brussels agreement.
This agreement dates back to 1984 and it should be consigned to
history. It is also significant that the FCO believe that there
"is no realistic prospect of the present Government of Spain
agreeing to exclude sovereignty from dialogue on Gibraltar."
This is a very defeatist approach and it does not make any sense
to continue with a mistaken and mis-guided policy purely on such
a basis. It also means that there is no incentive on the part
of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to move Spain away from
this.
It is also particularly disgraceful that the
FCO has still not committed itself to reject the Matutes proposals
at the next round of talks under the Brussels agreement, whenever
they might take place. This shows a blatant disregard for the
wishes of the people of Gibraltar as expressed in a unanimous
motion passed by the Gibraltar House of Assembly and a mass petition
handed in to the Prime Minister in December 1998 calling for such
a rejection.
ECO—Point 23
It is scandalous that the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office should choose to play on the word "robust" in
order to defend their position. However, "robust" they
may think they have been, the fact remains that Gibraltar has
been on the losing end time and again. Our position in Europe
continues to be eroded and questioned by Spain.
In general terms, the lack of positive action
in favour of Gibraltar is demonstrated by the response in the
following 15 areas.
(1) Gibraltar driving licences
The Foreign Office are in discussion with the
Commission.
(2) Gibraltar-issued passports
Spain has queried their status and the FCO remains
convinced that they conform.
(3) Gibraltar identity cards
No infraction proceedings against Spain initiated,
no indication that they will be.
(4) Delay over telephone operations
Foreign Office taking an "active interest".
(5) Non-recognition of Gibraltar's authorities
in the EU
Foreign Office "working hard" to ensure
we are affected as little as possible by non-recognition.
Foreign Office "will keep the situation
under review".
(7) Application to join in parts of Schengen
Gibraltar to be "included where appropriate".
Who decides what is appropriate?
(8) Voting rights for Gibraltar in EU elections
year 2004
Foreign Office "working hard".
(9) Failure to treat Gibraltar the same as
UK in the EU
Foreign Office "will continue to press the
Commission."
(10) Removal of restrictions on Gibraltar
in NATO
The Foreign Office will continue to talk to Spain.
(11) Protecting Gibraltar waters from illegal
fishing
Foreign Office states Gibraltar has no requirement
for protection.
(12) Discussions with Gibraltar before bilateral
Anglo-Spanish meetings
Foreign Office say "the need for such discussion
will be kept under review."
(13) Matutes proposals should be rejected
The Foreign Office will reply at the next meeting.
Rejection not confirmed.
(14) New process of dialogue to replace Brussels
process
The Foreign Office say the Spanish government
would not agree to this because they want to discuss sovereignty.
(15) Many occasions when British defence
has not been sufficiently robust
The Foreign Office is encouraged that no specific
examples have been given.
We shall be submitting a further paper on the
question of the provisions in the Treaty of Amsterdam.
The Gibraltar Socialist Labour Party and the
Liberal Party of Gibraltar are grateful for the opportunity to
make these submissions to the House of Commons Foreign Affairs
Committee and are at the disposal of the Committee to supply more
details if so required.
| 
