| Turkish Accession
|
|
Mr. MacShane: Not really—not in those terms. It took about 13 years after Britain first applied to join the then European Economic Community for it to enter in 1973—I might be a year or two out—and the other countries that have applied to join the EU have engaged in various levels of discussions and negotiations on their membership. Turkey has a lot to do economically and politically and to show that the welcome reforms that I mentioned are actually being implemented; it is reasonable to think that that will take some time. It is not for me to hazard a guess, but I do not think that it will happen this decade. Most commentators and experts are talking about some time in the next decade, but all along the way are openings and processes that will encourage the development of mutually beneficial relationships between Turkey and its partners in the EU. Mr. Robert Walter (North Dorset) (Con): Let me be bipartisan, unlike the Minister, and say that I believe that there is a degree of agreement among the parties in this country that Turkey should become a member of the EU. The problem lies elsewhere. As recently as in this morning's Financial Times, I saw a report of Angela Merkel, leader of the Christian Democratic Union in Germany, stating that her party was opposed to Turkish membership, and I have had many heated discussions with German friends on the subject. What steps have the British Government taken to secure a consensus, particularly in old Europe, on Turkish membership? Mr. MacShane: We are of course the oldest bit of old Europe—our parliamentary democracy stretches back hundreds of years. The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point, but I draw his attention to an excellent front Column Number: 7 page article published in Germany's Bild-Zeitung in which a forceful case was made in clear, expressive and vivid language for Turkey to enter the European Union. The article was penned by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I hope one day to see The Sun, Daily Mail or The Spectator publish an article in favour of Britain staying inside the European Union, as there should be some reciprocity.To be serious, the hon. Gentleman makes an important point. There is a lot of public concern throughout Europe about Turkey, and we should not dismiss all of that because we in this country have a bipartisan approach. I hope that he will forgive me if I sound partisan, but it would be most helpful if the UK democratic right talked seriously to its sister parties throughout Europe. At the moment, I have to persuade conservatives in Europe to be pro-Turkey. I wish that Conservatives in Britain were not so hostile to the European Union so that they could play a part in that effort. Mr. Boris Johnson (Henley) (Con): It is testimony to the pro-European feelings of Conservatives that they so warmly welcome Turkey's negotiations—after all, as the Minister said in a memorable article in that right-wing magazine The Spectator, Turkey is the original heart of Europe. Where was Europa when she was raped by the bull? She was on the shores of Turkey. To pick up the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for North Dorset (Mr. Walter) about adverse reactions to Turkey in old Europe, does the Minister think it right that the French President has called a referendum on the question? Does that not lay open Turkey's campaign for membership to frustration by the whipping up of Islamophobic prejudice in the French media? Is the Minister worried about that? Mr. MacShane: I am not worried about the whipping up of Islamophobia in the French media, but I do regret that a number of French right wingers are very unfair about Turkey. I have debated those issues with the former French President Mr. Giscard d'Estaing and had the pleasure of telling him—in French—that he was wrong on geography, wrong on history, wrong on culture, wrong on civilisation, wrong on Europe and wrong on the future of our world. That gave me a temporary thrill—he took it well. The hon. Gentleman is wrong to criticise the President of France, because President Chirac has been brave in facing down the vast majority of his own party members, including many of his most senior political associates and Ministers in his Cabinet, who want the EU to go much slower on Turkey. He sees the strategic advantages to Europe of Turkey joining. Yes, President Chirac has called for a referendum. Whether referendums on European issues are good or bad is another debate, but I do know that France held a referendum on Britain joining the EEC in 1972 and voted yes. The French Socialist party has just held a referendum on whether to say yes to the constitutional Column Number: 8 treaty and voted yes. I am sure that all the referendums on Europe over the next couple of years, wherever they are held, will say yes to Europe. I am equally sure that if one is held on Turkey in due course, it will say yes. I look forward to the hon. Gentleman standing with me, united on all the platforms campaigning for a yes to Europe in all the relevant referendums in the future.Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North) (Lab): I welcome Turkey's application. Among other things it will make Europe a much more diverse and loose arrangement, which would be a splendid idea. However, as my hon. Friend said, some serious problems remain on which there is some way to go. Has he seen the representations from Amnesty International about specific cases of trade unionists, failure to deal with police brutality, and so on? Is he using his influence with Turkey to secure greater advances in those respects and to develop civil liberties to a greater extent? Mr. MacShane: I have seen Amnesty International's report. I wrote to the director thanking her for taking on those investigations—I think I put that statement on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website. We welcome any spotlight thrown on any aspect of continuing human rights abuses in Turkey. We believe strongly that as the negotiations open, NGOs and human rights investigators will be able to take up those issues and bring them to public attention. Embassy officials in Turkey attend hearings relating to human rights: for example, we were regularly represented at the court hearings in respect of Leyla Zana, who was released earlier this year. We have bilateral human rights dialogues to urge further progress in particular areas and to raise specific issues. We provided about £2.5 million in the current financial year to organisations working on bilateral human rights reform. The Commission itself—remember, it cannot report on anything without being fairly accurate in its estimation—says that torture is no longer systemic and the Turkish Government's efforts to implement the legislative reforms have led to a decline in instances of torture. The Turkish Government are working closely with the Council of Europe's committee for the prevention of torture. I cannot exclude the possibility that wholly unacceptable things are happening in a prison cell in Turkey right now or that they will happen in Turkey in future, but every Turkish political representative whom I have met understands that the march to Europe is the best way of eliminating those abuses. We are happy to co-operate fully with Amnesty and share its thinking on the basis of all its excellent reports. Mr. Brady: The Minister referred to what he appeared to describe as the xenophobic decision of the French and the German Governments and most of the other member states in applying a derogation to free movement of labour when the new member states joined this year. It is likely that in the process of Turkish accession many of those same member states would seek a derogation of a certain number of years Column Number: 9 in respect of Turkey. Does he have a view as to what period of derogation might be allowed or might be sought by the German or French Governments?Mr. MacShane: I do not. The negotiations are undertaken by the Council and the Commission on behalf of all 25 member states. I was not referring to the decision of any Government on how they handle the quite normal seven-year transitional periods for full free movement of labour. I was referring to the unpleasant campaign in this country, which has upset a lot of British citizens of Polish, Czech, Hungarian and Baltic extraction. I genuinely do not know where we will be 10 years or more, so I cannot help the hon. Gentleman. I understand that the maximum period in the past has been seven years. I made the point in radio interviews in France and Germany that by 2020 we in ageing Europe might welcome younger workers to come and look after us. Some of us will still be virile and running marathons, but others will be prematurely in old age homes, exhausted by the stress and strain of life. We might look forward to young Turks coming in, working and contributing to our economy. However, that is not a big problem at the moment. Let us consider it when we have got through the difficult negotiations. Although this is a friendly debate, I stress, as I do when talking to Turkish colleagues and the Turkish media, that the negotiations are serious. Turkey has come an immense distance in the last three or four years, and it should have all our support and encouragement, but there is still a huge hill to climb and we must stay with the Turks all the way until they reach the top and see the sunny uplands of EU membership spread before them. David Cairns: May I return my hon. Friend to the attitudes of other European countries to Turkey's membership? I was in Paris a few weeks ago and was astonished by the ferocity of the campaign there—there were posters and people collecting signatures at the bottom of the Eiffel tower. Can he tell whether the objection is practical, in that people believe that Turkey is not there yet in terms of human rights, trade unions and so on—obviously we share that view, given that we are not urging immediate accession—or is there a deeper, more principled objection because Turkey is not a Christian country, or people think that it is not part of Europe? We are never going to overcome such objections. Could he tell during his debate with President Giscard d'Estaing what was the nature of people's objections? Were they practical, and therefore transitory, or were they principled and therefore unlikely to change?
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2004 | Prepared 7 December 2004 |
