§ 1. Mr. Moateasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress of negotiations for Great Britain's entry into the European Economic Community.
§ 9. Mr. Laurance Reedasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress of negotiations for entry into the European Economic Community.
§ 10. Mr. Mayhewasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the negotiations for Great Britain's entry into the European Economic Community.
§ 14. Mr. Eadieasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now make a statement on recent negotiations towards seeking entry to the European Economic Community.
§ 15. Mr. Martenasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the negotiations to join the Common Market.
§ The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Geoffrey Rippon):I hope 852 to make a statement on last week's negotiating meetings in Brussels later today.
§ 5. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further progress has been made in the European Economic Community negotiations towards the protection of British inshore fishing interests.
§ 22. Mr. Grimondasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in clarifying the position of fisheries in negotiations for entry into the Common Market.
§ Mr. RipponExploratory contacts, without prejudice to our position generally on the common fisheries policy of the Community, have continued with the Commission of the European Economic Community. Pending completion of the examination of the implications of this policy, Her Majesty's Government continue to reserve their position.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the House is getting tired of these rather vague answers? Can he give now a specific assurance that the Government will not sign on the dotted line before we get adequate safeguards for our inshore fishing fleet?
§ Mr. RipponWe shall certainly raise this matter at the appropriate time in the negotiations. One difficulty is that certain details of the policy have not yet even been settled by the Community itself. There is a need for clarification on quite a number of matters. The hon. Gentleman can be quite satisfied that this is not a matter which will go by default.
§ Sir F. BennettIs not the position exactly the same as indicated in the answers given by the Minister to several recent Questions from both sides of the House; namely, that in regard to any agreements reached before our possible entry to the Common Market Her Majesty's Government reserve their position absolutely both in regard to conservation and otherwise?
§ Mr. RipponSometimes people say that these negotiations are going too quickly and urge us to be careful. We have to get the right solutions and to 853 negotiate in a fair and reasonable way. Regarding the fisheries regulations, I assure the House that we have made it perfectly clear that, as far as we can now judge, they would be detrimental to our interests, and these matters must be taken up before we enter the Community.
§ Mr. HealeyDoes not the right hon. and learned Gentleman's last remark mean that he agrees with the vast majority of hon. Members on both sides of the House that the common fisheries policy, as at present defined, would be quite unacceptable to the British people and Her Majesty's Government? Further, does he expect to reach a solution on this problem before the Summer Recess, or is it likely to take until rather later in the year?
§ Mr. RipponI should not like to give any guarantee about the timing of it. Certainly it has to be done. I have never gone beyond saying that we would break the back of the negotiations by the end of the summer. There will be some matters still to be cleared up. This is one of them. I have represented very strongly to the Community, as have the other applicants, that a fisheries policy which may have been quite appropriate for the Community of Six is not appropriate for a Community of Ten in which the new applicants would represent 60 per cent. of the fishing interests.
§ Mr. Evelyn KingI fully understand the impossibility of my right hon. and learned Friend answering the sort of questions which he has just been asked, but would he bear in mind that in Dorset, and probably in all the coastal regions of England, there is alarm and apprehension about this aspect of the policy, possibly exceeding that about any other question in the negotiations?
§ Mr. RipponThe point is that on many of these matters of negotiation a lot of people are affected, and we deal with matters, first with one and then with another, to try to obtain a fair and reasonable settlement. I have no doubt of the strength of feelings on this matter.
§ 6. Mr. Selwyn Gummerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Common- 854 wealth Affairs when he now expects to have completed the main body of negotiations for Great Britain's entry into the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponThere is an evident desire on the part of the Community to carry the negotiations forward rapidly. There will be a further ministerial negotiating meeting on 7th June. In the present climate I remain confident that we shall complete the main body of the negotiations by the summer.
§ Mr. GummerIs my right hon. and learned Friend aware of the great satisfaction felt by many of us at the progress of the talks? Would he not agree that the major issue now outstanding on which progress has not been made is that of New Zealand, and will he make every effort to provide for New Zealand the same kind of help as he has promised to provide? Will he ensure that those who believe that we would leave New Zealand in the lurch will be proved wrong?
§ Mr. RipponI think that we can say, "So far, so good." But there remain a number of important issues still to be settled. I have always resisted trying to have a list of priorities among all the matters to be raised. In the House, in the country or in the Community I think that no one doubts how strongly we feel about the need to provide adequate protection for New Zealand dairy products.
§ Mr. HealeyWould the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept that it is the unanimous view on this side of the House, shared, I believe, by many hon. Members of the Conservative Party, that there should be adequate time for consideration of the terms when they are finally revealed, and that it would be quite improper for the Government to seek a decision of the House until several months have elapsed after the publication of the terms?
§ Mr. RipponI do not think that there has ever been any dispute about that. I hope that fairly shortly we shall be able to assess the main body of the terms, and, therefore, we shall be able to assess the situation as it then is. It will be some time before the question of actually signing a document of accession can arise. It would not be before the end of the year.
§ Mr. HealeyIt is a question not of signing a document, which is a matter for Her Majesty's Government in the last resort, but of when the House is asked to pronounce on the package as a whole. My point—and I hope that the right hon. and learned Gentleman can satisfy us on this matter—is that there should be a period of many weeks, even of some months, between the final publication of the terms and the Government requiring the House to take a decision on whether they should be accepted.
§ Mr. RipponCertainly there will have to be adequate time after the publication of the terms before the House is asked to pass a judgment. That is only fair and reasonable.
§ Mr. MartenMy right hon. and learned Friend has twice referred to the "main body" of the negotiations. Does he include horticulture and fishing as items in the main body?
§ Mr. RipponAs my hon. Friend will see, we have made some progress regarding horticulture in the last round of ministerial meetings. I have said that we shall have to bring up the fisheries question at the appropriate time. I am sure that my hon. Friend will be able to judge in a few weeks how far we have got.
§ 7. Mr. Strangasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Norwegian Government with a view to establishing a common British and Norwegian negotiating position towards the common fisheries policy of the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponWe have had contacts with the Norwegian Government on matters of mutual interest arising out of the European Economic Community common fisheries policy generally.
§ Mr. StrangDo the proposals put forward by the Norwegian Government for the modification of the common fisheries policy have the support of the British Government? Does the speech made by the Foreign Secretary at Aberdeen on Friday mean that the Government will not seek to take Britain into 856 the Common Market without first securing a modification of the common fisheries policy?
§ Mr. RipponWe are in contact with the Norwegian Government about their proposals. I do not think that their proposals would be in every respect the same as ours. I am going to Norway next week, and I am sure that this is one of the matters which we shall discuss. As I think I have made perfectly clear, we regard the fisheries regulation as raising very great difficulties for us as it now stands. We have reserved our position, and we shall certainly be dealing with this matter before the question of entering arises.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasIs it not absolutely clear from my right hon. and learned Friend's replies to this and previous Questions that the position of Her Majesty's Government is that they will use all their powers of persuasion, diplomacy, and so on, to protect the position of Britain's fishing interests?
§ Mr. RipponWe shall use those powers, and I am sure that we shall use them to the necessary effect.
§ Mr. James JohnsonIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that Norway not only is the largest fishing nation in Western Europe but was the only nation not to sign the 1964 Fisheries Convention? She now states that she will not sign the Fisheries Convention of the Common Market. Do we intend to go with her in this matter?
§ Mr. RipponWe are in contact with the Norwegian Government, which are responsible for their own policy and their own application. We keep very closely in touch.
§ 8. Mr. Turtonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the future of the Sterling Area in the event of a successful conclusion of Her Majesty's Government's negotiations to enter the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponI have nothing to add at present to what I said in the debate on 21st January and in answer to Questions on 22nd March and 26th April.—[Vol. 857 809, c. 1405–6; Vol. 814, c. 6–8; Vol. 816, c. 9 and 13.]
§ Mr. TurtonWill my right hon. and learned Friend give a categorical assurance that in the course of the negotiations he will not agree to any restriction on our freedom to invest in Australia, New Zealand and the other Commonwealth countries?
§ Mr. RipponWe have said that we are prepared to have discussions about the whole range of these matters and then we can see what will emerge. I do not think that I can deal in detail with many of the points raised by my right hon. Friend, which are matters for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I shall not go beyond what I said on 21st January, and I certainly cannot add to what my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has told the House on a number of occasions.
§ Mr. ShoreThe right hon. and learned Gentleman must know that it is plainly incompatible to have a free movement of capital within the sterling area and also a free movement of capital within an enlarged European Economic Community. If he cannot go beyond his brief, will he at least make it clear that he rejects the French proposal that we should start repaying the sterling balances at the rate of 5 per cent. a year?
§ Mr. RipponI think that the French proposals in negotiations which are confidential have received many interpretations. Discussions are proceeding at what we consider to be the appropriate place and in the appropriate way. I cannot add to what my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has said about them. We have said all along that we have no objection to having fairly wide ranging discussions about the future rôle of sterling, what might happen to its reserve role, and what might happen to the sterling balances. All those are matters for discussion. Before any arrangements were made, the House would have to be informed. We are at a very preliminary stage. As to the negotiations, we are dealing with the harmonisation of capital, and we have proposals as to how that can be dealt with in the transitional period, but we have not yet reached agreement about it.
§ 11. Mr. Sutcliffeasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will state in£million sterling total European Economic Community expenditure on the agricultural fund in 1966–67 compared with 1970–71, the annual rate of increase in this expenditure and the percentage proportions spent on the guarantee and guidance sections respectively for the five-year period; and what increase in guidance section expenditure has been authorised under the Mansholt Plan.
§ Mr. RipponI am arranging for the statistics called for in answer to the first part of the Question to be published in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
With regard to the last part of the Question, the price increases and structural changes approved by the Council of Ministers of the European Economic Community do not amount to approval of what is know as the Mansholt Plan. No decision has been taken to increase expenditure under the guidance section of the European Economic Community agricultural guarantee and guidance fund above the limit of£119 million which has obtained since 1969.
§ Mr. SutcliffeI suspect that the figures will reveal a five-fold increase in open-ended expenditure, which is surely preposterously expensive in relation to the achievements of the common agricultural policy in disrupting world food markets and ossifying European agriculture in its present pattern. If the Mansholt Plan leads to larger farm units and greater efficiency, will it not also lead to an increase in surpluses? So why has my right hon. and learned Friend agreed to this policy, and to destroying the present balance of British agriculture between livestock and cropping, without making progressive dismantlement of this policy as at present conceived at least as live an issue as the future of sterling?
§ Mr. RipponMy hon. Friend has asked me for some statistics, with which I have provided him. When he sees the statistics, he will see that he is right in saying that the expenditure has increased, for a number of reasons—because the Community has extended the coverage of the C.A.P. gradually and because it is spending more to reduce the surpluses of which my hon. Friend complains.
§ Following are the statistics:
§ Definitive expenditure figures from the Agricultural Fund are not available after 1965–66. The figures below relate to the budget years 1967 to 1971.
| BUDGETS FOR THE AGRICULTURAL FUND 1967–71 | ||||||
| £ million | ||||||
| Budget Year | ||||||
| 1967 | 1968 | 1969 | 1970† | 1971 | ||
| Expenditure relating to. | 1966–67 | 1967–68 | 1968–69 | July-December, 1969 | 1970 | 1971 |
| Guarantee Section | 123.3* | 547.1 | 831.6 | 647.7 | 984.6 | 977.7 |
| Guidance Section | 44.1* | 118.8 | 118.8 | 59.4 | 118.8 | 188.8 |
| Expenditure relating to. | 1967 | 1968 | 1969 | 1970 | 1971 | |
| Special Sections | — | 86.8 | 58.5 | — | 28.9 | — |
| Total Expenditure | 176.4* | 752.7 | 1,008.9 | 707.1 | 1,132.3 | 1,069.5 |
| * Converted from units of accounts at the rate of£=2.80 U.A. All other conversions at£=2.40 U.A. | ||||||
| † In order to change the budget to a calendar year basis 1970 includes expenditure for 18 months for the Guarantee and Guidance Sections. |
§ The increase in annual expenditure from the Agricultural Fund from 1967 to 1971 is +265.7 per cent., +34.0 per cent., +12.2 per cent. (this relates to the increase in only 12 months' expenditure attributable to 1970) and -3.2 per cent. respectively. These percentages have been calculated from the original figures in units of account.
§ The proportions of expenditure from the various sections of the Agricultural Fund are shown below.
| Per cent. | |||||||
| 1967 | 1968 | 1969 | 1970 | 1971 | |||
| Guarantee Section | … | … | 75.0 | 72.7 | 82.4 | 88.7 | 89.2 |
| Guidance Section | … | … | 25.0 | 15.8 | 11.8 | 9.7 | 10.8 |
| Special Sections | … | … | — | 11.5 | 5.8 | 16 | — |
| The foregoing percentages must be regarded as approximate as they are based on comparisons of expenditure from different sections of the fund for periods which are not identical. |
§ 16. Sir R. Russellasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate he made, when formulating his proposal to the Six for the phasing-out of Australia from the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement during the transitional period, of the effect his proposal would have on the export quotas of other countries, in particular developing countries, in view of Article 34 of the International Sugar Agreement.
§ 36. Miss Joan Hallasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions and conclusions have taken place concerning the importation into the United Kingdom of Australian sugar during the European Economic Community talks.
§ Mr. RipponThe Community has agreed that we may continue to meet our obligations under the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement to Commonwealth countries, including Australia, until the expiration of the Agreement at the end of 1974. Thereafter we have asked that the Australian sugar quota to our market 860 should be phased out gradually over the remainder of the transitional period.
§ Sir R. RussellMy right hon. and learned Friend has not answered my Question. Will he make an answer as to the effect on the International Sugar Agreement of phasing out Australia? If Article 34 has to be implemented, will it not cut down the quotas of the developing countries under the International Sugar Agreement and also reduce the supply of cane sugar to our refineries?
§ Mr. RipponAs I have already explained, we have completely safeguarded the position until the end of 1974. The International Sugar Agreement comes to an end in 1973. Therefore, the application of Article 34 does not arise.
§ Mr. Clark HutchisonWill my right hon. and learned Friend explain why Queensland sugar should be phased out at all?
§ Mr. RipponOur purpose is basically to safeguard the interests of the developing countries of the Commonwealth for 861 the longer term within the framework which we are now negotiating.
Mr. J. T. PriceAs the right hon. and learned Gentleman has so far failed to give any clear answers to the many Questions tabled on this matter, will he make a genuine attempt when he is next at the Dispatch Box to give some indication that he is prepared to defend vital British interests in these negotiations and not act like a weak limpet and give away all our vital interests to our trading competitors in Europe?
§ Sir J. GilmourWould my right hon. and learned Friend say whether, in phasing out Australian sugar, it is intended that this should be replaced by sugar grown in Great Britain or elsewhere in Europe?
§ Mr. RipponI shall be having something to say in my statement later which will be relevant to this. Certainly I would assume that there will be room for expansion of our sugar beet production.
§ 17. Mr. Ronald Bellasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the cost to date of distributing through the Post Office fact sheets on the Common Market.
§ Mr. RipponThe Post Office does not make a charge for distributing the leaflets within its own organisation or for issuing them to the public. Its facilities for doing so are, of course, limited.
§ Mr. BellDoes my right hon. and learned Friend think it right to use the Post Office for this sort of tendentious pamphleteering, and, if he does, will he make funds available for a series of pamphlets, equally impartial, from the other standpoint, which I shall be happy to draft for him?
§ Mr. RipponI am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend for his offer of help. What we are doing is to put in a convenient form the facts for which the public is asking.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisAs the Post Office is now supposed to be working on a profit-making basis, is it not the case that every person who contributes to the operation of the Post Office is paying for 862 this distribution whether he likes it or not? Why should the Post Office charge people—when the overwhelming majority are against going into the Common Market—for twisted propaganda in favour of entry?
§ Mr. RipponI do not accept the last assertion. The rest of the question is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications.
§ Sir D. Walker-SmithWhen my right hon. and learned Friend uses the expression "in a convenient form" to whom is it convenient and for what purpose?
§ Mr. RipponIt is convenient for those who read it.
§ 21. Sir A. Meyerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he now has to meet his opposite numbers in the Six other than informal meetings with the Council of Ministers.
§ Mr. RipponI am not in a position to announce any plans between now and the next ministerial negotiating meeting on 7th June. But I shall certainly be meeting representatives of Governments of the Six.
§ Sir A. MeyerDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, whereas it would be a mistake to import into the negotiations matters which are not directly relevant to them, since the object of the negotiations is to achieve an end which goes beyond the negotiations, there would be every advantage in seeking to maintain or, indeed, to extend the discussions with his opposite numbers on military, political and financial matters?
§ Mr. RipponThe discussions can be fairly wide-ranging about the future. What I am concerned to do is to get on with the matters which are within my province at the negotiating table in Brussels.
§ 23. Mr. Deakinsasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if his proposals for the United Kingdom percentage contribution to the European Economic Community Budget were based on the assumption of a 10-nation European Economic Community; and what alteration would be needed in 863 his proposals in the event of Denmark and Norway not joining the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponThe answer to the first part of the Question is "Yes", and to the second part "None".
§ Mr. DeakinsWould the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm, therefore, that in the event of Britain entering a Community of seven, eight, nine or ten nations, no alteration would be needed in the proposals he has put before the Community as a compromise on this issue?
§ Mr. RipponThat is correct.
§ Mr. HayhoeDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is a highly pessimistic interpretation of the present state of the negotiations to say that there is no real likelihood of the Scandinavian countries, Norway and Denmark, joining if we join?
§ Mr. RipponI think that that is probably a correct assessment of the situation.
§ Mr. MartenDoes not my right hon. and learned Friend realise that both Norway and Denmark, and indeed Ireland, are to have a referendum? If the people in those countries turn down the Common Market, those countries will not go in. Why are they less democratic than we are?
§ Mr. RipponThey are not less democratic. They have their own constitutional procedures, we have ours, and we shall hold to ours.
§ 25. Mr. Hayhoeasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in the European Economic Community negotiations to agree on satisfactory arrangements to safeguard the interests of the Commonwealth Caribbean sugar producers.
§ Mr. RipponI shall be covering fully the progress in the negotiations on Commonwealth sugar in my statement later this afternoon.
§ 29. Mr. McCrindleasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to what extent the question of 864 New Zealand's exports of agricultural exports was discussed at the most recent meeting in Brussels on Great Britain's proposed entry to the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponThere was no statement from the Community at the meeting on 11th and 12th May, but I raised this matter and reminded the Community of the nature of New Zealand's special problems and of the need to find a suitable solution to them.
§ Mr. McCrindleWill my right hon. and learned Friend note that even among those of us who most welcome the progress of the last week there is an intense desire to make sure that we do everything possible for our New Zealand friends?
§ Mr. RipponI quite agree.
§ Mr. PeartIn view of the recent reply of the French President to the Prime Minister of New Zealand, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman recognise that there can be no sell-out on this issue? New Zealand has supplied the British market for many years and her economy is geared to this country. That is, I think, recognised on both sides of the House. I hope that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will remain firm on this issue when he negotiates.
§ Mr. RipponThere can be no sell-out on this or anything else.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterFollowing my right hon. and learned Friend's answer to me after he made his previous statement, can he confirm that it is his intention to negotiate for permanent entry of New Zealand dairy produce prior to, and as a precondition of, British entry?
§ Mr. RipponWe have never promised anybody a permanent solution for anything. We have said that there must be continuous arrangements subject to an appropriate review.
§ Mr. PagetWill the right hon. and learned Gentleman recognise that as New Zealand stood by us from the other side of the world in two world wars, no advantage to us personally or as a country would be worth letting her down and letting down the economy which she has constructed to fit in with our requirements?
§ Mr. RipponI have not lost a single opportunity to make clear to the Community how strongly we feel about this matter and how essential it is that there should be adequate safeguards for New Zealand and that, in saying this, we are seeking to defend not British interests but the interests of New Zealing.
§ Mr. Michael StewartHas the right hon. and learned Gentleman noticed the recent debate in the Council of Europe at Strasbourg on this matter in which representatives of both major parties in Britain expressed the view that merely transitional arrangements would not be sufficient and delegates from the continental countries expressed their good will towards and understanding of New Zealand's position?
§ Mr. RipponI am glad that both delegations have made the position clear. That is also the British Government's position. I am also quite clear that there is growing understanding in the Community of what this means and how necessary it is to find the right solution.
§ 35. Mr. Donald Stewartasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what consideration he has given to the different trading patterns of Scotland and England in the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. RipponThe negotiations for entry into the European Economic Community take fully into account the interests of all regions of the United Kingdom, including Scotland.
§ Mr. StewartIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that Scottish exports to the E.E.C. are less than one-half of England's and that the opposite situation exists with regard to exports to E.F.T.A.? Would he not, therefore, regard it as irrational as well as unjust that he should negotiate on behalf of the two countries, and would he arrange for separate Scottish representation under the terms of our Treaty?
§ Mr. RipponI do not think there will be any need for such separate Scottish representation.
§ 37. Miss Lestorasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth 866 Affairs under what circumstances overseas workers will be accepted as community workers within the European Economic Community in the event of Great Britain joining.
§ Mr. RipponI would refer the hon. Lady to the Answer given to her on 14th May.—[Vol. 817, c. 177.]
§ Miss LestorBearing in mind the length of time in which some of us have tried to get this position clarified, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm whether or not Commonwealth immigrant workers in this country will have to become citizens of Britain before they are acceptable as community workers within E.E.C. in the event of Britain joining?
§ Mr. RipponAs I said, all these matters are being clarified in discussion in the Community. I recognise that there are a great many anxieties about this, which we shall have to clear up. The negotiations are lengthy, and they are complicated; I am afraid that we can take only one matter at a time.
§ Mr. HefferWould not the right hon. and learned Gentleman for once this afternoon give a definite answer to one issue which is being raised? I, personally, am not against going into the Common Market, but if the right hon. and learned Gentleman continues along this line it is quite clear that the Government are going to get us at all costs into the Community without explaining the position to the country.
§ Mr. RipponThe hon. Member need feel no such anxiety. There are discussions going on with the Community in order to ensure that the various difficulties which are mentioned from time to time do not arise.