EUROPEAN COMMON MARKET (Hansard, 1 June 1961)

§ 34. Mr. du Cann
asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a further statement of Her Majesty's Government's policy with regard to British participation in the European Common Market.

§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)
No, Sir. I have nothing to add to what I have already said in answer to recent Questions and what has been said by my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal in the debate.

§ Mr. du Cann
Is my right hon. Friend aware that public opinion continues to be anxious on this subject? Although the economic implications of a British entry into the Common Market are largely understood, the political implications are not, and many people think that this decision whether to go into the Common Market is the gravest which Britain has had to make since 1939? In those circumstances, does not my right hon. Friend think that before far-reaching political arrangements are made there ought be some clear expression of opinion by the electorate either at an election or through a referendum?

§ The Prime Minister
Of course I would not deny what my hon. Friend says, but I have not at the moment anything to add to what has already been stated.

§ 36. Mr. Biggs-Davison
asked the Prime Minister whether he will seek to arrange a special Commonwealth conference to work out the conditions under 415 which all Commonwealth countries could be closely associated with those of Europe.

§ The Prime Minister
As the interests and circumstances of the various countries of the Commonwealth differ so much from those of each other and from those of the countries of Europe, I doubt whether a conference directed to the object which my hon. Friend has in mind would be fruitful.

§ Mr. Biggs-Davison
Are not the grave anxieties of New Zealand and Canada and the Afro-Asian Commonwealth well founded? Is it not true that the expansion of population and markets in the Commonwealth would be far greater than those of Europe? Is it not quite insufficient for the Government to seek to negotiate to maintain current levels of Commonwealth exports to Britain and Europe, and should not the Government rather seek to make good the years of neglect of Commonwealth trade, refashion the thirty-year-old and eroded system of Commonwealth preference and thus come to mutually advantageous terms in Europe?

§ The Prime Minister
What I was saying was that my hon. Friend had suggested a conference. I think that it would be much better dealt with by careful consultation with each Commonwealth country separately, because they vary so much in what happens to be their major interest. That is the point that I was trying to make.

§ Mr. M. Foot
Is it not the case that, whatever may be the variations in the economic interests of different countries of the Commonwealth, all the countries of the Commonwealth have a common interest in the political implications of entry to the Common Market? For that reason, should not the Prime Minister try to decide a general Commonwealth policy?

§ The Prime Minister
That is another point, but it is not the point which, I think, my hon. Friend had mainly in mind.

§ 37. Mr. Biggs-Davison
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of recent Government statements on the United Kingdom's future relations with Continental Europe, he will give an assurance that the Government will not seek 416 to surrender, merge or limit the sovereignty of Parliament by the transfer of control, without time limit or power of withdrawal, over the economic or other policies of the United Kingdom to any supranational or international body.

§ The Prime Minister
I have already made it clear that we cannot sign the Treaty of Rome without negotiation about the commitments we would be required to undertake. What degree of surrender of sovereignty might be involved would depend on the nature and extent of these commitments. But full membership of the European Economic Community would inevitably involve some limitations on our sovereignty and freedom of independent action in those fields covered by the Treaty. This general principle has, of course, been accepted by all the present members of the Community. What would be of equal concern to us would be how the general principle was translated into specific obligations.

§ Mr. Biggs-Davison
Since the Commonwealth partnership is based on national sovereignty, would my right hon. Friend agree that it would be unthinkable for Britain to be merged in a federal union which would split the Commonwealth and frustrate a larger association between a greater Europe and the expanding Commonwealth?

§ The Prime Minister
This is a question of how far any treaty—and, of course, all treaties involve some derogation of sovereignty—on the purely commercial and economic aspects involves a derogation of sovereignty and how far we would be prepared to accept it. All those must be matters of negotiation and consideration.

§ Mr. Thorpe
Is the Prime Minister aware that the Treaty of Rome was signed over four years ago? Is he aware that the Lord Privy Seal said that the extent of the Government's activity was exploration? May we know when the Government will cease to explore facts which most other people know and get down to negotiation?

§ The Prime Minister
The hon. Member and his hon. Friends have the very simple view about this matter that we ought simply to sign on the dotted line and have no more to say about it. I do not think that that is the view of the 417 House as a whole. Both parties realise the great advantages and the dangers and are in favour of very careful consideration, both of how it would affect us and how it would affect, above all, the Commonwealth countries and also our partners in the European Free Trade Association, before embarking upon a formal negotiation.