HC Deb 11 December 1968 vol 775 cc424-34
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Michael Stewart)

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I should like to make a statement on the Falkland Islands.

On 26th March last I gave a full explanation to Parliament of our reasons for holding talks with the Argentine Government about this question and I also described Her Majesty's Government's policy in these talks in some detail.

In their talks with the Argentine Government Her Majesty's Government have been trying to reach an understanding with Argentina with the object of securing a satisfactory relationship between the islands and the nearest continental mainland. Since that time, the talks have continued and the two Governments have reached a measure of understanding, although this is not yet complete.

There is a basic divergence over Her Majesty's Government's insistence that no transfer of sovereignty could be made against the wishes of the Falkland Islanders.

This pledge has been repeatedly given to Parliament by Ministers who have reiterated on numerous occasions the principle that Her Majesty's Government could only consider the solution of this dispute by a cession of sovereignty to Argentina, first, as part of an arrangement which would secure a permanently satisfactory relationship between the islands and Argentina and, second, if the islanders themselves regarded such an arrangement as satisfactory to their interests and it accorded with their wishes.

It is on this basis that Her Majesty's Government propose to continue to negotiate with the Argentine Government in order to overcome the obstacles which now exist to a normal relationship between the islands and the mainland.

Her Majesty's Government are very conscious of the close ties between the population of the islands and the United Kingdom and of their loyalty to the Crown. It is for this reason that Her Majesty's Government have insisted on the paramountcy of the islanders' wishes. Her Majesty's Government have not exerted any pressure on the islanders to change those wishes nor do they intend to do so.

We shall continue to discharge our responsibilities towards the islands as a British Dependent Territory. In this context it is particularly relevant that, in the course of my right hon. and noble Friend's recent visit to the Falkland Islands, the Executive Council accepted that the British Government have been acting in good faith in our talks with Argentina and that our understanding with Argentina, if it is reached, will be fully in keeping with the promise that Her Majesty's Government would not transfer sovereignty against the wishes of the islanders.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

The House will be grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for taking the earliest opportunity he has had to make the statement. May I ask him these questions? As the right hon. Gentleman said that Her Majesty's Government are not using sovereignty as a bargaining factor and it is the basic difference with the Argentine Government, as it is quite clear the islanders do not wish sovereignty to be transferred and the right hon. Gentleman has said that the wishes of the islanders are paramount, and as the Argentine Foreign Minister has said that there can be no agreement unless sovereignty is ceded, will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House that the question of sovereignty, therefore, will not enter into any future negotiations he may have with the Argentine?

Mr. Stewart

No, I cannot give that undertaking. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] The undertaking I have given, and have given on many occasions, fully secures the position of the Falkland Islanders themselves, but I believe that, despite the fact that there is what I referred to as a basic divergence, we should still try to seek agreement if it can be reached consistently with the principle I have so repeatedly laid down.

Mr. Thorpe

In the right hon. Gentleman's reference to securing a satisfactory relationship between the islanders and Argentina, may we take it that what the Government have in mind are matters like trade and communications and that there is no question of any constitutional alteration envisaged during the nego tiations?

Mr. Stewart

What I said was that the only circumstances in which we could consider settling this dispute by a cession of sovereignty would be, first, that that would be part of the settlement which got a satisfactory relationship in all respects and, secondly, that it did not transgress the principle that we will not transfer sovereignty against the islanders' wishes.

Mr. Hooley

Would my right hon. Friend agree that a 19th-century colonial situation cannot be perpetuated indefinitely in respect of these islands, nor indeed of other colonial territories round the world? Will he confirm that the best way of arriving at a satisfactory settlement is to continue the civilised dialogue he has established with the Argentine Government?

Mr. Stewart

I believe that it is right to continue the dialogue. My hon. Friend referred rightly to attitudes in the world that have been taken up about our former colonial possessions, but I must stress this point: the Charter of the United Nations lays down that in dealing with these matters the interests of the inhabitants must be paramount. We take our stand on that position, but I believe, also, that if we try to live in this century and not in the last it is right by patient argument to try to reach a satisfactory solution.

Mr. Heath

Is the Foreign Secretary saying that he is now continuing these negotiations in order to find a way of transferring sovereignty which he will then put to the islanders to see whether it is satisfactory or not? Is that the purpose of his negotiations now?

Mr. Stewart

What I want to reach is a settlement. From our point of view we want to reach a settlement which will remove the difficulties that there are now between the Argentine and the islanders and to remove the dispute from the United Nations. To do that it has been necessary, as I have repeatedly told the House, to make sovereignty one of the topics of discussion, but we could not agree to the cession unless it were agreeable to the islanders themselves. This has been made clear all along.

Mr. Heath

With great respect, the right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question. It is quite specific and goes to the heart of the matter. Is he now negotiating with the Argentine Government for a form of transference of British sovereignty to the Argentine over the islands which he can then put to the islanders to see whether or not it is satisfactory? Is that what his negotiations are about?

Mr. Stewart

I think that it would be more accurately put thus. [HON. MEM- BERS: "Answer."] I am answering the question. I am trying to seek an agreement in which, if there is any reference to cession of sovereignty, it would have to be subject to this over-riding condition. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, we have already taken the Executive Council of the islands into our confidence about the progress of the talks so far. It might well be necessary to do that again if the talks made further progress. If the talks resulted in any kind of understanding which involved in any way a cession of sovereignty, it would have to be subject to this condition.

Mr. Crawshaw

Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of the suspicions is that, although no pressure is being brought to bear on the islanders, the blackest possible economic future is being portrayed for them if they continue to be one of our colonial possessions? Can my right hon. Friend say that this is not so and that, in fact, economic assistance will be given to them if they continue?

Mr. Stewart

Yes, Sir. I am glad this question has been asked, because there have been allegations of the kind to which my hon. Friend refers. They are complete fabrications; they are wholly untrue. For the last 20 years, under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act, we have been giving grants to the islands, quite properly. This was one of the things I had in mind when I said that we should continue to discharge our responsibilities to the islanders as a British Dependent Territory.

Mr. Dalyell

Granted the paramountcy of the wishes of the islanders, is the Foreign Secretary aware that some of us, unlike the Opposition, want adult relations with the nations of South America?

Mr. Stewart

I think that this is an important consideraton. To be fair, my hon. Friend will agree that some hon. Members opposite are aware of this aspect of the matter. I am certainly aware of it, and that is why I am endeavouring to reach agreement.

Mr. Sandys

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that his tortuous replies give the impression that he is in the process of selling the Falkland Islanders down the river? Since the Argentine Government have made it perfectly clear—they have said so publicly—that they will not conclude an agreement which does not include the transfer of sovereignty, what is the use of going on talking?

Mr. Stewart

The right hon. Gentleman rarely rises without accusing somebody of bad faith. His statements and declarations are by now totally devalued. The statements I have made repeatedly to the House have not been tortuous at all. I have not disguised from the House that we are in discussions with the Argentine. I have not disguised from the House that sovereignty is part of those discussions. I have made clear to the House the whole time that in no case would there be a cession of sovereignty against the islanders' wishes. It is only possible for someone who wishes to mislead to twist that into something else.

Mr. Wellbeloved

Will my right hon. Friend continue to bear in mind that his fair and straight statement that this country is not prepared to cede sovereignty of the Falkland Islands against the wishes of the inhabitants is fully accepted by all reasonable people? Will he also continue to encourage the Falk-lands Islanders to understand that the long-term solution of their future depends on the establishment of friendly relations between themselves and the Argentine?

Mr. Stewart

I think that the islanders are very well aware of that. I think it was partly because they had that in mind that they authorised my right hon. and noble Friend to say that they recognised that the British Government were acting in good faith and that any understanding, if it were reached, would be consistent with the pledge concerning their wishes.

Mr. Clark Hutchison

Does the Foreign Secretary realise that the Government's attitude is doing untold harm to the islanders and their prospects for future trading? If an agreement is reached with the Argentine, will it be written in that document that there will be no transfer of sovereignty against the islanders' wishes?

Mr. Stewart

I cannot answer as to the exact wording of a document that has not yet been reached or agreed. In no circumstances would the United Kingdom put itself in a position in which it could be required to surrender the sovereignty against the wishes of the islanders. The hon. Gentleman has done his best to create disturbance in the islands, but has not succeeded.

Mr. Winnick

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that people who believe in majority rule will be very happy with the statement he has made today? Is he also aware that there has been a vicious campaign by the Opposition and by the Tory Press against our right hon. and noble Friend the Minister of State—a smear campaign somewhat along the lines of that being conducted in relation to a Bill which the House is considering later today?

Mr. Stewart

I am aware that there have been a number of wholly false statements about my right hon. and noble Friend. The decisive reply to them has been given by the statement of the islanders themselves, which I have twice quoted to the House.

Mr. Turton

Do these talks merely concern the Falkland Islands, or do they extend to the Falkland Island Dependencies in the Antarctic, which are very valuable?

Mr. Stewart

The talks do not apply to either of those.

Mr. James Johnson

After hearing the Secretary of State's assurances, which, of course, I believe, may we on this side be told why we ever began the dialogue? Are not these 2,000 people of British stock merely pawns to the Argentine? Is not this affair part of a wider setting in which the Argentine is staking a claim to the Continental Shelf and to fishing limits of about 250 miles?

Mr. Stewart

We began the talks for the reasons I have explained to the House, that there is a dispute here, that the United Nations is seized of it, that there are, while the dispute persists, certain vexations to which the islanders are subject and which they would be glad to see removed. I repeat that I do not know whether we shall be successful, but I think that I should try and go on trying to see whether these drawbacks to the islanders could be removed without the abandonment of the one vital point in the matter.

Mr. Eldon Griffiths

Does the Foreign Secretary's statement involve any going back on undertakings, either given or implied, that he has offered to the Argentine Government? Does he not think that it would be better if as Foreign Secretary he were encouraging and not discouraging these people to stay British?

Mr. Stewart

The suggestion that I am discouraging them to stay British is wholly untrue. The hon. Gentleman has no evidence for it. The answer to his first question is, "No". Indeed, so far there has been no undertaking made of understanding reached of any kind. The talks are still in progress.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

What useful purpose is served by continuing to include the question of sovereignty in the talks when the attitude of the islanders is perfectly clear?

Mr. Stewart

Because I still believe that although we must continue to maintain the position we have maintained about the islanders' wishes, it might none the less be possible to reach an agreement which would be beneficial to them and to our relations with Latin America generally.

Mr. Albu

Does my right hon. Friend think that the wilful misunderstanding of his repeated statements by the Opposition is motivated by care for the interests of the inhabitants or by memories of their colonial past?

Mr. Stewart

I always hesitate to speculate about people's motives, particularly the motives of some hon. Members opposite. What is quite clear is that the Government's position in this has now been stated over and over again. There is no excuse for misunderstanding.

Mr. Braine

rose—

Hon. Members

Withdraw.

Mr. Braine

While, contrary to what the right hon. Gentleman has just said, I fully accept the Foreign Secretary's good faith and his obvious intention today to clear the air, would he not agree that as long as sovereignty remains on the agenda, statements, whether true or untrue, that joint efforts being made by the two Governments to convince the islanders of the necessity for a change in their links are bound to be misunderstood, if one bears in mind—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."]—the Argentine Government's known intention to have sovereignty—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech"]—and the British Government's open declaration that they do not rule out the possibility—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. We are discussing a serious topic.

Mr. Braine

I hope that the House will listen.

Would the Foreign Secretary not agree that these statements have to be seen against the known interest of the Argentine Government to acquire sovereignty and the openly declared view of Her Majesty's Government, expressed only last week, that they do not exclude the possibility of the islanders changing their minds about their remaining British in the future?

Mr. Stewart

No one can make statements which exclude all possibilities in the future. If the hon. Gentleman wants to be quite clear about this, he had better study the terms of the statement which I have just made. I said that we could only consider a solution based on a cessation of sovereignty, first, as part of a generally satisfactory relationship between the islanders and the Argentine and, second, if it accorded with the wishes of the islanders. That has been made clear over and over again. I do not think that this provides any background for the determined efforts of the hon. Gentleman, which I understand that he engaged in last week, to present the House with an incorrect account of what my right hon. and noble Friend has been doing.

Mr. Judd

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that, in view of the complexity of the problem, the Government are right not to be pushed into an irrevocable position on sovereignty or on any other matter and to place so much emphasis on the most thorough possible discussions with the islands' population?

Mr. Stewart

This is a problem which is both complex and difficult. I understand the difficulties which right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite raise, in view of known statements of both Governments about this matter. I assure them that I am making it clear that we shall not abandon this essential principle that I have stated so often. In view of that, I do not know whether it will be possible to reach an agreement. I hope that it will be, in everyone's interests, including the islanders'.

Viscount Lambton

Will the Foreign Secretary go a little further than he did in his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Clark Hutchison) and make it clear that, if an agreed statement is signed, it will include the phrase that sovereignty will depend upon the wishes of the people? Secondly, will he say whether there have been negotiations between England and the Argentine about sales to the Argentine of ships essentially dependent on this agreement?

Mr. Stewart

Certainly, there has been no discussion about sales of ships in connection with this agreement. Whether there have been other discussions connected with ships at any time, I could not say without notice. But it has no connection with this matter.

On the other point, as I said to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Clark Hutchison), whatever ultimate wording or arrangement may come out—and I cannot predict this—it would have to be consistent with the pledge that I have made repeatedly.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

We can, it necessary, return to some aspects of this tomorrow I think that the right hon. Gentleman has done his best to reassure the House on this matter of principle concerning the paramountcy of the islanders' wishes. As the Argentine Minister has made it clear that there can be no agreement unless sovereignty is conceded, can the Foreign Secretary say what is the point of going on with these negotiations?

Mr. Stewart

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman has got that quite right. My own statement just now mentioned solution of the matter by cession of sovereignty, but made it clear what were the essential conditions that we should lay down. It may be that those conditions prove so unacceptable that agreement cannot be reached. That is what I do not yet know.

Several Hon. Members

rose —

Mr. Speaker

Order. We must move on.