HC Deb 17 May 1973 vol 856 cc1689-91
11. Mr. Alfred Morris

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the latest position regarding determination of the EEC negotiating position in the current International Sugar Agreement talks.

Mr. Godber

At the first session of these talks, the Community has proposed the extension of the present agreement, in the light of the situation on the world market and the uncertainty as to the future sugar policy of a number of countries, including that of the Community itself. This negotiating position will be reviewed in time for the second session, which begins in September.

Mr. Morris

Will the right hon. Gentleman press the EEC for a definitive assurance that there will be continuing access for at least 1.4 million tons of Commonwealth sugar? Will he ask the EEC to go beyond aura à coeur and fully endorse the Lancaster House agreement?

Mr. Godber

With respect, the hon. Gentleman has put two separate points. The forthcoming sugar agreement is a matter that is being considered separately from the ISA. That is a matter which will be discussed under Protocol 22. The arrangement for 1.4 million tons is one to which this country is firmly committed by the undertakings given here. I have no reason to believe that we will not honour it. The International Sugar Agreement is a wider aspect, and the important thing is to see that the Community adopts a positive attitude. That is the influence which we are seeking to exert.

Sir Robin Turton

As, previously, the EEC has refused to co-operate with the International Sugar Agreement, is not it absolutely vital that at an early stage, and before the resumption in October, the EEC makes a declaration that with Britain in the Community it will cooperate with the International Sugar Agreement? Further, the EEC should outline its attitude towards cane sugar production and the refining of cane sugar. So far, it has been highly unco-operative.

Mr. Godber

I remind my right hon. Friend that the undertaking given at the UNCTAD conference at Santiago was not a binding commitment but a clear indication. We are using our influence within the Community to ensure that we get a positive attitude when the next session meets.

Mr. Buchan

Is that good enough? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that it is enough to say that he is using his influence when we passed an Act in this House on the assurance which we received aura à coeur and everything else. We still have not obtained agreement on that assurance. There is a dangerous situation facing the producer countries. The right hon. Gentleman must do better than this.

There is a double problem. First, there is the continuing access in respect of the 1.4 million tons. Along with that is the expansion taking place within the EEC and the danger of unloading that sugar on to the world market, with the consequent effect on the cane producing countries. The right hon. Gentleman must see that as his No. 1 priority if he is serious about the influence which he claims to have on the EEC.

Mr. Godber

The hon. Gentleman is confusing two issues. There are two quite clear and separate issues. One is the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement. I have no reason to believe that the Community will not honour the undertaking that was given in this House when the time comes. This is a matter for negotiation by the Commonwealth countries for operation after 1974. It was because I wished to ensure that this went smoothly that I called a meeting of the Commonwealth countries at Lancaster House two months ago. I consider that a useful meeting took place. The issue of the International Sugar Agreement is a wider issue altogether. At present no quotas are operating because of the high price of sugar. No one can say that the issue is urgent in the context of the immediate future. I agree that we must get a satisfactory outcome and I want to see the Community playing a full part. The argument that the Community has put forward so far is that we should continue with the present arrangement for another two years. This affects not only the Community but certain other countries whose arrangements go on after 1974.

Mr. Marten

As we are a signatory to the International Sugar Agreement and the Common Market is not a signatory, if the Common Market decides that it will not become a signatory to the International Sugar Agreement have we the sovereignty left in this Parliament to be a signatory to the International Sugar Agreement on our own without the Common Market?

Mr. Godber

We must first seek to ensure that the Community belongs to the International Sugar Agreement. On the specific point which my hon. Friend raised, it is an important understanding that as a member of the Community we shall be able to play our part in the International Sugar Agreement but there will not be a position outside the Community.