HC Deb 14 December 1953 vol 522 cc36-9
Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

I ask your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, to make the following statement.

For some time past Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have had under consideration the question whether the territorial waters round the coasts of the United Kingdom and overseas territories for which Her Majesty's Government are responsible should be redefined in the light of the judgment delivered by the International Court of Justice on 18th December, 1951, in the Anglo-Norwegian fisheries case.

After full consideration of the matter they have come to the conclusion that there should be no change; these territorial waters will, therefore, continue to be delimited by a line drawn three miles from low-water mark, or in the case of bays and estuaries, from a closing line drawn at the first point where they narrow to 10 miles in width.

The judgment in the Norwegian case depended on the facts of that case. In the view of Her Majesty's Government it ought not to be inferred from that judgment that, as a matter of international law, a baseline drawn in the manner authorised by that judgment in that particular case would necessarily be applied to all or any other coasts.

Her Majesty's Government recognise that, legal considerations apart, an extension of United Kingdom territorial waters by means of the drawing of baselines, such as have been adopted along the indented coast of Northern Norway, would be of some advantage to British inshore fisheries. Her Majesty's Government sympathise with the point of view of the inshore fishermen and are conscious of the effect on them of their decision.

Her Majesty's Government are also informed that an extension of territorial waters would be of some advantage in certain Colonies and other overseas territories for which Her Majesty's Government are responsible and they have taken this fully into account. Her Majesty's Government have, however, come to the conclusion that wider considerations, arising out of the naval, mercantile and deep-sea fishery position of this country and like interests in the other territories concerned, must take precedence.

Her Majesty's Government consider that the true interests of all seafaring nations are best served by the greatest possible freedom to use the seas for all legitimate maritime activities and they view with concern the increasing encroachments on the high seas which have taken place in recent years in many parts of the world.

At the same time, Her Majesty's Government will continue to co-operate in securing the fullest possible measure of conservation of fisheries by means of international agreement through the commissions set up under the International Fisheries Conventions.

Mr. Younger

If Her Majesty's Government are accepting the narrow definition of United Kingdom territorial waters, despite the interests of inshore fishermen, to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman referred, ought not the Government simultaneously to be challenging the practice of an increasing number of foreign countries in applying a much wider definition against us of their territorial waters? If we are to have this decision and, coupled with it, the inactivity of the Government in the Icelandic case, is not that giving us the worst of all worlds?

Mr. Lloyd

Her Majesty's Government have refused to accept the view of the Icelandic Government in this matter and it is in order to rally opinion in favour of our view that this statement has been made. Our view is that the best way to protect the interests of the inshore fishermen is by seeking to do it by bilateral international agreement rather than by an arbitrary extension of territorial waters.

Mr. A. Henderson

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman make it clear that in making this announcement Her Majesty's Government do not seek to reflect in any way on the validity of the decision of the International Court of Justice, and that it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government to accept the rule of international law?

Mr. Lloyd

I hope that my statement made that abundantly clear. As far as the facts of that particular case are concerned, we accept, of course, the decision of the International Court of Justice.

Sir R. Boothby

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that so far as the Moray Firth is concerned the decision of the Government is a great mistake?

Mr. Lloyd

As I made quite clear, we appreciate that this decision will have an adverse effect upon the interests of inshore fishermen but we have felt, apart from the other wider considerations to which I have referred, that we have also to take into account the results on the fishing industry as a whole, and this decision is in the interests of the fishing industry as a whole.

Mr. Grimond

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that not only in the constituency of the hon. Member for East Aberdeenshire (Sir R. Boothby) but also in a number of constituencies all round the coast of Scotland this decision will cause grave disquiet? Can he assure the House that particular efforts are being made to safeguard the rights of Socttish fishermen so that they are not sacrificed to the invasions of foreign trawler men?

Mr. Lloyd

I agree that that is a matter which requires action, but the best way to tackle that is by bilateral agreement with the countries concerned, and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries has had the matter very much in mind.

Mr. Duthie

In view of the depredations by foreign trawlers in the Moray Firth area, from which British trawlers are excluded, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consider approaching the Governments concerned to restrain their vessels from fishing in those waters?

Mr. Lloyd

Certainly.

Sir D. Robertson

If the Government find themselves unable to protect British restricted fishing grounds against foreign trawlermen, is it now their intention to give British trawlers fishing outside the Icelandic three-mile limit the protection which they require once they enter those extensive restricted grounds?

Mr. Lloyd

That is another question.

Sir D. Robertson

But does it not follow from the Government's statement that they will penalise British trawlermen unless they give them adequate protection to enter Icelandic restricted limits?

Mr. Lloyd

That is a different matter. If my hon. Friend will put a Question down I will endeavour to answer it.

Brigadier Clarke

Have we in this House the right, Mr. Speaker, to expect the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) to make a statement today, since his character was impugned last Thursday?

Mr. Speaker

That does not arise on this statement.