NEW PROPOSALS FOR ACCESS
128. On 25 July 2002, the Spanish daily El Pais
published an interview with Peter Hain, in which he said that
the British Government proposed to meet Spanish objections to
the existence of a British military base in Gibraltar by converting
it into a NATO military base, under British control but accessible
to all NATO members. This would appear to contradict a previous
assurance from the Foreign Secretary that "part of the aim
of the negotiations is to ensure that it remains a British base".[131]
The consequences of such a move would be profound from the point
of view of the people of Gibraltar. The base is not a single set
of buildings in a single location, but is rather a collection
of sites dispersed throughout the territory of Gibraltar. Spanish
military personnel would, in the event of the base becoming a
NATO base, presumably gain access not to an isolated section of
Gibraltar, but to much of its territory.
129. Despite extensive redundancies in the 1990s,
the Ministry of Defence continues to employ about 1,000 Gibraltarian
residents, and the support of this work force, together with that
of the wider population, is essential for the military facilities
to be able to operate satisfactorily. The military already operates
under some constraints, as a result of the mistrust engendered
by the recent job cuts. We conclude that there is a risk that
in the event of an agreement concluded between Spain and the United
Kingdom which did not enjoy the support, or at least the acquiescence,
of the people of Gibraltar, the military base might find its ability
to operate severely constrained by the local population.
Responsibility for Gibraltar
within the FCO
130. Somewhat to our surprise, we have learnt that
the British Permanent Representative on the North Atlantic Council
(in effect Ambassador to NATO), Sir Emyr Jones Parry, has retained
some of the responsibilities for Gibraltar which he held in his
previous post as Political Director at the FCO.[132]
In oral evidence to us in July, Sir Michael Jay, Permanent Under-Secretary
at the FCO, explained to us that "the decision was ... that
[Gibraltar] should stay with Emyr Jones Parry who had been handling
it and who had the expertise, and that he should be supported
by James Bevan who was promoted a Director and had the time to
spend to focus on that issue, and around them form a team which
has been working closely with Mr Hain and with the Foreign Secretary
on Gibraltar".[133]
It is also less than immediately obvious why principal responsibility
for Gibraltar should rest with Mr Bevan, Director South-East Europe
in the FCO. We recommend that the Government explain in its
response to this Report how responsibility for Gibraltar is apportioned
within the FCO, with an explanation of why this is the case.
96 Ninth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee,
Session 1999-2000, Gibraltar, HC 863, paras 8-9. Back
97
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
HC 413, Q 32. Back
98
Ibid., Q 69. Back
99
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
Gibraltar, HC 413, Q 34. Back
100
Ev 33, para 73. Back
101
See also Appendix 1, Ev 10. Back
102
Q 21 [Jack Straw]. Back
103
Ev 33, para 76. Back
104
Fourth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 1998-99,
Gibraltar, HC 366, para 67; Ninth Report from the Foreign
Affairs Committee, Session 1999-2000, Gibraltar, HC 863,
para 10. Back
105
Ev 17, paragraph on telephones. Back
106
Ev 17, paragraphs on the Brussels Process; letter from Mr Caruana,
18 March 2002, Ev 57-58. Back
107
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
Gibraltar, HC 413, pp 68-71; Appendix 4, Ev 12-14. Back
108
Q 52 [Jack Straw]. Though see also Appendices 1 and 2, Ev 10-11. Back
109
Ev 64-65. Back
110
Ev 67. Back
111
Ev 65. Back
112
Sixth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2000-2001,
Gibraltar, HC 319, p 1. Back
113
European Commission Press Release IP/02/430. Back
114
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
Gibraltar, HC 413, pp 19-52. Back
115
Ibid., p 52. Back
116
European Commission Press Release IP/02/430. Back
117
IMF Report, March 2002, Executive Summary, para 3. Back
118
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
Gibraltar, HC 413, Q 13. Back
119
eg..The Guardian, 3 June 2002. Back
120
Ev 22-24. Back
121
Twelfth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
FCO Annual Report, HC 826, Ev 82, para 19. Back
122
See para 46 above. Back
123
Ev 35, para 93. Back
124
IMF Report, Executive Summary, para 9. Back
125
IMF Report, Executive Summary, para 19. Back
126
HC Deb, 5 February 2002, col 746. Back
127
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
Gibraltar, HC 413, Q 29 [Mr Caruana]. Back
128
See Financial Times of 22 October 2002, p6, and www.taxnews.com/asp/story/story.asp?storyname=9784 Back
129
Twelfth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
FCO Annual Report, HC 826, Ev 82, para 19. Back
130
Response to Written Question, 31 October 2002. Back
131
Q 17 [Jack Straw]. Back
132
eg. Government of Gibraltar Press Release No. 3/2002, 7th January
2002. Back
133
Twelfth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2001-2002,
FCO Annual Report, HC 826, Q 174. Back