§ Q1. Mr. G. Campbellasked the Prime Minister what recent discussions he has had with heads of other Governments about Great Britain's application to enter the European Economic Community.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)So far as heads of E.E.C. Governments are concerned, with the President of the French Republic on 19th and 20th June and with the Prime Minister of Italy on 27th and 28th June. In addition I have of course discussed this problem with heads of Commonwealth and other non-E.E.C. Governments.
§ Mr. CampbellAs the Foreign Secretary said at The Hague on Tuesday that Britain wanted the negotiations to be short and that much of the preliminary work had already been done, can the Prime Minister yet give an indication of the timetable which he expects?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. It is impossible for me to do so because, although we continually emphasise the need for urgency, and, indeed, get considerable support for that in the discussion, the timetable does not lie exclusively in our hands.
§ Mr. ShinwellIn the discussions with Heads of other Commonwealth Governments, did my right hon. Friend depart from the conditions that have been acceptable to the Labour Party for some years and which have been swept under the carpet completely by the Foreign Secretary in his speech to W.E.U.?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. They have not been swept under the carpet. 1983 The Commonwealth conditions were never spelt out, for example, in detail in any decision of the party conference in 1962. The basis on which I discussed the question with Heads of other Commonwealth Governments was the Motion accepted by the House in May, my own speech in that debate, together with the speeches of other Ministers, and any points which my Commonwealth colleagues wished to raise.
§ Mr. HeathWe welcome the more realistic approach by the Foreign Secretary in including a common European attitude towards defence as one of the Government's objectives in wanting to become a member of the E.E.C. After his last visit to President de Gaulle, the Prime Minister told the House that he had discussed with the President prospects of technological co-operation, research and development generally. Did he discuss the A.F.V.G. project with him?
§ The Prime MinisterI know that the right hon. Gentleman has talked in terms of a defence community and, I think, of an Anglo-French deterrent. What my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary said in his speech, as he has again made clear today, related to a greater influence of Europe in world defence organisation and in the alliance organisations such as N.A.T.O. There was no suggestion of a European defence community in anything he said.
During my visit to President de Gaulle, we had a very brief discussion on the question of the A.F.V.G. He indicated something of the budgetary difficulties, but said that this should be a matter of discussion between my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and M. Messmer.
§ Q2. Mr. Eadieasked the Prime Minister what part the Minister of Power will have in the negotiations for entry into the Common Market concerning the coal industry.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer I gave on 6th June to a Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell).—[Vol. 747, c. 189.]
§ Mr. EadieWould not my right hon. Friend agree that the Minister of Power must know more about the details and 1984 complexity of these industries? Would he not further agree that the recent Middle East crisis has underlined how vital our indigenous resources of coal are?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree on both points. That is why my right hon. Friend the Minister of Power will play an important part in any discussions particularly relating to membership of the E.C.S.C., not only in relation to coal but also to steel.
§ Mr. VarleyIs my right hon. Friend aware that the coal industries of the Common Market countries are experiencing problems far greater than the difficulties of the British coal industry? Does he not agree that our entry into the Common Market is likely to exacerbate the existing problems of the British coal industry?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is true that some of the Common Market coal industries are having a very extensive rundown at the present time and there has been a significant reduction in production, but not, I think, in imports from outside the Six. My hon. Friend will have seen that the estimate of the National Coal Board is that it would hope for an increase of up to 3 million tons in our exports to the Community if we succeed in joining.
Mr. Edward M. TaylorWould the Prime Minister agree that one of the most serious burdens on Scottish economy is the differential prices for coal and gas? Would he confirm that neither the Government nor the Ministry of Power will accept unreservedly the E.C.S.C. rules which would make these differentials permanent and perhaps increase them?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is a matter of how we go on in the negotiations. I do not think that it is the view of my right hon. Friend that anything involved in the present operations of the E.C.S.C., whose practices are in some cases rather difficult to define, would have any adverse reactions on the coal industry of this country generally or Scotland in particular.
§ Q4. Mr. Martenasked the Prime Minister which Ministers are currently responsible for studying alternatives to joining the Common Market.
§ The Prime MinisterThe Government as a whole considered the alternatives carefully before we decided to apply for membership of the European Communities. I do not think that any further studies are needed at this stage.
§ Mr. Martenis the Prime Minister aware of the growing number of people and organisations seriously interested in studying the alternatives? Could the Government not perhaps publish a White Paper giving in outline some of the alternatives so that we can think about them in the case of a breakdown?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I have said a number of times, not least in the debate, there are possible alternatives and we would not regard failure to get in as meaning the collapse of all hopes for the future. We think that getting in is the best answer for our economic policy. In the debate on 8th May and succeeding days, my right hon. Friends and I gave the House considerable details about what the alternatives were and what our judgment on them was.
§ Mr. Hugh JenkinsIs my right hon. Friend aware that one of the consequences of our determined application to join the Common Market is that our traditional trading partners are beginning to make plans for the diversification of their own trade? Is he not aware that in the event of our failure, which many of us hope will come about, the situation for creating an alternative will be very difficult indeed?
§ The Prime MinisterThe diversification by some of our traditional trading partners has been going on for many years and has nothing to do with our recent application. The Prime Minister of Australia told me that he had seen the figures on the very morning on which we met. I cannot remember them exactly, but they showed that about 40 per cent. of their exports, if not more, go to the countries of South-East Asia, and their orientation in trading matters has been going in that direction for many years.