HC Deb 08 December 1969 vol 793 cc2-6
2. Mr. David Howell

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what commitments he has entered into with the European Free Trade Association countries regarding protection of their interests in the event of negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Economic Community.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. George Thomson)

I would refer the hon. Member to the agreed communiqué issued after the recent E.F.T.A. Ministerial meeting, the text of which is in the OFFICIAL REPORT for the 12th of November.—[Vol. 791, c. 97–9.]

Mr. Howell

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have seen that communiqué? It still leaves unanswered a very difficult question. If the British Government sign the Rome Treaty and we adopt common external tariffs, what happens to the other E.F.T.A. countries which do not get in? Would we be obliged to raise tariffs against them?

Mr. Thomson

As the hon. Gentleman knows, what happened at the E.F.T.A. Ministerial meeting was a reaffirmation of the position which the E.F.T.A. Council took up in London in April 1967, and this took account of the many differing objectives of the individual E.F.T.A. countries in the relationship with the European Community. I hope that the hon. Gentleman was reassured by one passage from the communiqué which came out of the Hague summit meeting, where those who took part in the meeting said that it was their intention that as soon as negotiations with the applicant countries had opened discussions would be started with the other E.F.T.A. members immediately afterwards.

Mr. Wood

Can the right hon. Gentleman help us further? When the negotiations take place for British entry into the Community, will they take place in parallel with negotiations for the entry of the other three countries into the Community, or separately?

Mr. Thomson

This is a matter for the Six themselves. The updated opinion of the Commission was that the negotiations for the applicant countries should take place in parallel, and there are important practical arguments in favour of that course.

Mr. Jay

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be extremely undesirable that we should have to raise tariffs again against goods from the other E.F.T.A. countries? Can my right hon Friend give an assurance that that will not be allowed to happen?

Mr. Thomson

My hon. Friend is asking a hypothetical question about how prolonged negotiations with a number of countries will end. A great deal will depend on what the non-applicant E.F.T.A. countries decide they wish to seek in their own interests.

7. Mr. Barnes

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the progress of Great Britain's application to join the European Economic Community in the light of the outcome of the European Economic Community summit meeting at The Hague.

9. Mr. Marten

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on Great Britain's application to join the Common Market in the light of the outcome of The Hague summit meeting.

12. Mr. Mayhew

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on Great Britain's application to join the European Economic Community in the light of the Community's summit meeting at The Hague.

18. Sir G. de Freitas

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on recent developments inside the European Economic Community which have been notified to Her Majesty's Government because they affect the United Kingdom.

34. Mr. Turton

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress of the United Kingdom's application to join the Common Market following the European Economic Community Summit Conference at The Hague.

Mr. George Thomson

I would refer hon. Members to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in answer to Questions on 4th December.—[Vol. 792, c. 1695–1703.]

Mr. Barnes

Would he not agree that the entry of Britain could be instrumental in opening the way to a new phase of co-operation between the Common Market countries? Is it not important that the negotiations should be forward looking in this sense rather than that they should concentrate upon minor matters.

Mr. Thomson

Yes, Sir, I am happy to find myself in general agreement with my hon. Friend. So long as we can negotiate acceptable terms for British accession, I should have thought there was tremendous and perhaps historically positive advantage for countries both on the mainland of Europe and for ourselves.

Mr. Marten

Would the Minister confirm that the present position about any supranational or federal structure in our relation; with Europe is that the Prime Minister for home audiences sticks to what he said in reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) on 6th February, that he is not in favour of a supranational structure and will give no support to it, whereas the position taken up by the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary at the Monnet Committee on 22nd July, as reported by the leader of the Liberal Party, was that he had no objections to a federal solution?

Mr. Thomson

I thought that the hon. Gentleman might have grown weary of trying to draw this erroneous distinction. What the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have said on the matter is identical.

Mr. Mayhew

Would my right hon. Friend agree that a more promising prospect in Europe is due not only to the robust attitude of the Government in the past two years, but also to the excellent work in Europe of voluntary organisations supported by hon. Members in all parts of the House? Would he not agree that the small subsidy paid to these organisations by the Government has been of great advantage to the national interest?

Mr. Thomson

I agree with my right hon. Friend.

Sir G. de Freitas

Is it not particularly encouraging that some of the statements at The Hague last week definitely recognised the fact that the present agricultural policy of the Six was most unsatisfactory both as regards surpluses and financial contributions?

Mr. Thomson

Yes, Sir, I certainly believe that to be an encouraging feature of the results of the discussions at the Hague.

Mr. Turton

Would the right hon. Gentleman make clear what the Prime Minister did not make clear, whether the then existing agricultural regulations will be a precondition to negotiations, or whether it would be possible for Britain to negotiate for a change in agricultural policy and for a change in the method of financing?

Mr. Thomson

The position about this matter is reasonably clear in the aftermath of the summit meeting. I do not wish to underestimate the difficulties associated with the negotiations, especially on agricultural matters. What the Six agreed at the summit was that they themselves should agree a definitive financial arrangement on agriculture, but they said specifically that this must be done in the context of seeking an enlarged community. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Sir G. de Freitas) has just said, the Community also laid significant emphasis on the need to seek changes in common agricultural policies so as to reduce budgetary burdens. In addition to that it is widely recognised among the Six that the present common agricultural policy would place an inequitable burden on this country.

Mr. Jay

If my right hon. Friend is expecting major changes in the agricultural policies of the Six, would it not be wiser to know what these are if any before we commit ourselves?

Mr. Thomson

No, Sir. The right thing to do is to seek negotiation at the earliest possible moment. We have been waiting far too long as it is.