Commonwealth Sugar (Hansard, 12 April 1973)

§ 13. Mr. Judd
asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on his negotiations with the EEC following the meeting in London of trade ministers from Commonwealth sugar-producing countries.

§ Mr. Godber
There has not yet been any discussion within the Community on the specific issues arising out of the recent conference of Commonwealth sugar-exporting countries. Negotiations for the period after 1974 will be a matter for the Commonwealth countries themselves, and they have now set up a standing committee in London to co-ordinate their aproach to the Community.

§ Mr. Judd
In view of the Government's unhappy experience with the EEC agricultural policy to date, is this not the time to make it absolutely plain and beyond all doubt that the guarantee of the British Government to ensure the access of Commonwealth sugar to the EEC, at least at the present level, is absolute, that we shall never surrender 1494 to the French sugar beet lobby, and that if need be, when the time comes, we are prepared to exercise a veto?

§ Mr. Godber
The matter was completely covered by the discussions which we had at Lancaster House the week before last and by the communique issued afterwards. The Commonwealth countries concerned are in full accord with the United Kingdom Government's view. There is no need for me to add anything to that. The provisions of protocol 22, Article 3, set out precisely the arrangements to be entered into by the Commonwealth countries concerned. We have been having discussions with them, but it is for them to make the initial move. We, as members of the Community, will be playing an important part in the resolution of the problems on the lines—I trust—which the hon. Member has indicated.

§ Mr. Marten
Does my right hon. Friend not agree that there is one little link missing in all of this? Cannot the Common Market adhere to the Lancaster House agreement and say outright, "We accept it", and not "have it at heart", or whatever the translation is? Let it sign it and say that it accepts it whole-heartedly.

§ Mr. Godber
I am sure that my hon. Friend realises that this matter was fully dealt with at the time of the Treaty of Accession. There is no point in reopening it now. The important thing is that the Commonwealth countries shall work together in this matter. That was the whole purpose of my discussions with them the week before last. They are fully in agreement with our views about this question and I do not see any need to take further action, other than to keep in the closest touch with the Commonwealth countries concerned.

§ Mr. Jay
Will the British Government be represented, as the British Government, in the negotiations on the International Sugar Agreement which are to begin very shortly and about which we have been given no information in this House?

§ Mr. Godber
The International Sugar Agreement is an entirely different matter. We were talking about the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement. The British Government will be playing their part as 1495 members of the Community, which is the correct way for us to handle what is an international arrangement affecting us and the other members of the Community. We will be fully involved.

§ Mr. Farr
Does my right hon. Friend hope to see the nine members of the Community become signatories to the International Sugar Agreement, since this is of vital importance? When the Australian quota for the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement ends in 1974, does my right hon. Friend envisage that it will be gradually phased out, as would be desirable, rather than being suddenly cut off, with the risk of creating disruption in world prices?

§ Mr. Godber
The position about the International Sugar Agreement was spelt out in the UNCTAD discussions in Santiago last year. My noble Friend Lady Tweedsmuir, representing the British Government, supported and welcomed the statement made then. I believe that the position is well understood. The Australian quota has been discussed in the past. Our understanding with the Australian Government about this was made known by my right hon. and learned Friend at the time, and I have nothing to add.

§ Mr. Shore
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that what he has said about the International Sugar Agreement is not good enough? Will he think about this again? Does he not agree that the International Sugar Agreement is of immense relevance to the future prosperity of Commonwealth sugar growers? If we are not able to continue as a member of that agreement and if the Community, which has swallowed up the independent British commercial existence, is not a member either, how can we make any representations to defend Commonwealth sugar producers from within that International Sugar Agreement, as we should? Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider this matter and make a full and proper statement on it before the Easter Recess?

§ Mr. Godber
The right hon. Gentleman is distorting the position. The position of Commonwealth sugar producers is covered by protocol 22. The right hon. Gentleman is now talking about the International Sugar Agreement and 1496 the arrangements that will be made for membership. I have said that as members of the Community we shall be playing a full part in seeking to ensure membership of the International Sugar Agreement. This is how we shall play our part in these matters. We are involved with European sugar production as members of the Community and it is right that we should exercise our influence in that way.