Andrew
Mackinlay: I listened carefully to what the Minister said
and I shall read it in the official record. I think that I heard her
say that that matter has not been raised by the Governments of the
overseas territories, but I do not suppose that they were aware that
that option was open to the UK. Therefore, will she undertake
expressly, albeit without commitment—I am not so naive to expect
her to give a commitment—to canvass the Governments and
legislatures of the overseas territories on whether they would like
that to be considered? I would go away a happy man if she were prepared
to do that
today.
Gillian
Merron: From my recollection of having been my hon.
Friend’s Whip some years ago, I would never call him naive and I
do not intend to start doing so now. I am reluctant to give the
assurance for which he asks simply because I am about to spend the next
three days with representatives of the overseas territories. I shall
meet them both as a group and individually, so they will have every
opportunity of raising this matter. I will give an undertaking,
however, that should I be approached in that regard, I will gladly
inform him and anyone else who wishes to know.
On why the
territories are not represented in Parliament, I must report that no
overseas territories Government has made such a request. They do not
form part of the metropolitan UK, and they have their own, separate
jurisdictions. The Government believe that the interests of voters in
the overseas territories are served well by their local legislatures,
established under their own, respective constitutional
arrangements.
I am pleased
that human rights have formed an important part of the debate. While
the protection and promotion of human rights in a territory is
primarily the responsibility of the territory Government, it is
ultimately the responsibility of the UK. We ensure that territories
fulfil their obligations under international human rights treaties that
have been extended to them. During the consultative conference, this
week, we will raise the issue of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
rights. It is important to us to ensure that constitutions fulfil
obligations. The
British Indian Ocean Territory has been mentioned, in relation to the
recent ruling by the Law Lords, in the highest court in the land. The
policy remains that no person has the right of abode in the British
Indian Ocean Territory, or the right to enter it, unless authorised. I
restate—this is not the first time that a Minister has put this
on record—that the resettlement of people from the Chagos
islands in the ’60s and ’70s was carried out in an
unacceptable way, and we strongly regret the hardship that resulted
from that. Although that is the end of legal process in Britain, it is
not the end of our caring for the people of the Chagos. The ruling is
not about what happened in the ’60s and ’70s; it is about
what we do now. With the greatest will in the world, we cannot turn the
clock back. We have to consider security and the fact that changes in
the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 have allowed members of
overseas territories to claim British citizenship, which a number of
people from the Chagos islands have done. The courts have previously
ruled that fair compensation has been paid, and we have no legal
obligation to pay further compensation.
Last week, I
was in close consultation with my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley
(Laura Moffatt), who represents many people who were originally from
the Chagos islands. She has welcomed, on their behalf, the actions that
have been taken so far and the way in which we are working closely with
the community. I shall continue that work, to ensure that those who
wish to go back to visit will have the chance to do so and will be
financially supported by the UK Government in doing
so.
Andrew
Mackinlay: I mentioned the Chagos in the context of the
European Union. I wanted to know whether the Government would consider
adopting the recommendation of the Foreign Affairs Committee that the
right to UK citizenship—and, ipso facto, the right to EU
citizenship—should be extended to third-generation
Chagossians.
Gillian
Merron: My hon. Friend did ask about that, but that is all
governed by the 2002 Act. The Act applies to people from the Chagos
islands and their descendants, as well as to other overseas
territories, and the matter is therefore provided for in current
legislation. The
hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire raised the issue of rendition and
Diego Garcia. Contrary to earlier assurances that Diego Garcia would
not be used for rendition flights, investigations revealed that that
occurred on two occasions in 2002. However, since February the US
Government have confirmed that, with those exceptions, there have been
no other instances of US intelligence flights landing in the UK, our
overseas territories or the Crown dependencies with a detainee on board
since 11 September 2001. Importantly, Secretary Rice has underlined the
US’s firm understanding that there will be no rendition to the
UK, our overseas territories, the Crown dependencies or our airspace
without first receiving our express permission. The Foreign Secretary
made a written ministerial statement to that effect on 3 July 2008 to
update the House on the
matter. Jo
Swinson: I welcome the Minister’s assurance.
However, have the Government had an independent investigation to
determine whether that is the case or are they merely relying on what
the US has said? Surely it would make more sense for the Government to
try to ascertain whether that is the case using the information
available to them. The Government might want to get involved with some
of the human rights organisations that have compiled significant
dossiers on the subject, which would be helpful in ascertaining whether
that is the
case.
Gillian
Merron: This matter was discussed only last month at the
UK-US political-military talks. I do not wish to restate all of the
details that I have just mentioned. I say to the hon. Lady that if
there is evidence to the contrary, I would be glad to see it. I refer
her to the Foreign Secretary’s written ministerial
statement. In
closing, it is in all our interests to ensure that the overseas
territories enjoy a stable and ever prosperous future. I believe that
getting the relationship with Europe right is an important part of
securing that future. That is why this Government are committed to
ensuring that we get the best deal possible. The Green Paper that we
are discussing is very much part of that
process. Question
put and agreed
to. Resolved, That
the Committee takes note of European Union Document No. 11238 and
Addendum 1, the European Commission Communication: Green Paper: Future
Relations between the EU and the Overseas Countries and Territories;
recalls that such Communications are consultation documents and are not
legally binding; welcomes the Commission’s Communication as the
start of the process of the renegotiation of the Overseas Association
Decision; and supports the Government’s
response.—[Gillian
Merron.] Committee
rose at twenty-three minutes to Six
o’clock.
| 
