§ The Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Roy Hattersley)With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement about business to he taken in the Council of Ministers of the European Community during November.
Written forecasts for September and October were deposited at the beginning of each month in the normal way. The monthly written forecast for November was deposited on 1st November. At 688 present seven meetings of the Council of Ministers are proposed for November. Environment Ministers will meet on the 7th; Foreign Ministers on the 12th and the 13th; Finance Ministers on the 18th; Agriculture Ministers on the 18th and the 19th; Justice Ministers on the 26th; Budget Ministers on the 28th; and Development Ministers on a date yet to be set.
The Foreign Ministers' Council will discuss the report which they asked the Commission to make in response to the Foreign Secretary's statement of 4th June about the impact of the Community Budget on the United Kingdom. They will also consider the Community's generalised scheme of preferences for 1975, the régime governing commercial relations with State-trading countries in 1975 and relations with Canada. The Council will also examine progress in the negotiations for a convention of association under Protocol 22 of the Treaty of Accession, including the arrangements for imports of sugar from certain developing, mainly Commonwealth, countries.
The Finance Ministers, in addition to their usual monthly discussions of the economic situation in the Community, are expected to give further consideration to the proposed joint Community borrowing scheme and possible financial assistance to Italy. The Budget Council will consider the European Assembly's observations on the Community's draft budget for 1975.
The agenda for the Agriculture Ministers' meeting is still to be prepared, but the Council is likely to continue consideration of the future Community sugar beet régime and arrangements for sugar imports under Protocol 22; and to discuss proposals to increase import prices of New Zealand butter and cheese under provisions of Protocol 18 of the Treaty of Accession.
Development Ministers will discuss future commission proposals for the overall framework of future Community development policy. The Environment Ministers will discuss proposals to implement part of the environment action programme.
The Council and Conference of EEC Ministers of Justice will take stock of the work on company law, the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, the recognition of the status of companies and 689 other legal persons, the assimilation of private international law rules, the strengthening of co-operation in taking legal action following infringement of Community economic law and the liability of EEC officials in respect of criminal law.
§ Mr. RipponI thank the hon. Gentleman for his helpful business statement. It seems to cover almost everything except the future of the regional fund. Can he say when that is likely to be discussed again? Will he recall that the Foreign Secretary said last Wednesday that the aim was to bring the so-called renegotiations to an end by the spring? Has any timetable been agreed with our partners in the Community? The Foreign Secretary also said that the White Paper on progress would shortly be avalaible. Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this will be before Christmas? One appreciates that the Government have made no decision of any kind in the matter, but would they consider issuing at the same time as the White Paper a Green Paper setting out the place of the referendum in the British constitution?
§ Mr. HattersleyCertainly a White Paper will be available before Christmas. I cannot give the right hon. and learned Gentleman the exact date, he will understand, but it will be available in the very near future. As for discussions on regional policy and the regional fund, no Council of Ministers expects to discuss it at that level during the next month, but work is going on at official level, which I can assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman is intended to secure our renegotiation aims of enabling the British Government to apply those regional policies that they think best for Great Britain. As for the renegotiation timetable, it is impossible to give a date within the year. The Labour Party manifesto and my right hon. Friend confirmed that the policy of the Government was to take a decision within a year. The important date is October 1975, when the British people will decide how they see the future of this country.
§ Mr. ThorpeIs the Minister aware that we are delighted to see all this good, splendid European Community work going on and that we wish the Ministers well? Is he further aware that some of my colleagues who visited Brussels recently were disturbed to hear from 690 M. Lardinois that no application had been made by the Government for a temporary guaranteed price for beef pending the renegotiation of the CAP? Since the agricultural agenda is still being negotiated, would it not be a good thing to put that on the agenda for 18th or 19th November?
§ Mr. HattersleyMy right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture made it clear in the House on Wednesday what our policy was towards the new beef régime and our intentions for getting new arrangements. I have no doubt that he will continue to pursue that at the Council of Ministers next month.
§ Mr. BuchanWould my hon. Friend confirm that the decision made about sugar has still to be confirmed by the meeting of Foreign Ministers? Would he also assure us that, before representatives from this country go to that meeting, they will listen to those of us who believe that we understand the deal rather better than may have appeared in recent weeks, because some of us believe that it is a thoroughly bad deal and not in the interests of this country?
§ Mr. HattersleyThe Minister of Agriculture told the House last week that he regarded it as a good deal, and that is the deal that he accepted on behalf of the Government through the Council of Agriculture Ministers. There are still some details to be confirmed and some details to be prepared and agreed. My right hon. Friend will pursue these during the rest of the month, but he made the Government's case absolutely clear last week and I have nothing to add to what he then said.
§ Mr. John DaviesUnless I mistook him, the Minister made no reference to further discussions this month on energy, or to those concerned with the meeting between the Community and the Arab States. Can he say when they are likely to come forward again, particularly in view of the extreme urgency of the energy matters?
§ Mr. HattersleyIt is unlikely that energy matters will be discussed in great detail at the Foreign Ministers' meeting or meetings over the three days of this month. As for future plans, it is impossible to anticipate what will be discussed 691 in December, after a number of important initiatives in Europe have been mounted.
§ Mr. EnglishDoes the Minister recollect that, in the last Parliament, in answer to a question from me, he said that the Government would answer the Council of Ministers' questionnaire on political union? Will he tell us which system of direct election we favoured in the answer to that questionnaire?
§ Mr. HattersleyAs I recall it, I told my hon. Friend that we would eventually answer that questionnaire but I could advise him of neither the date on which the answer would be given nor, when it was given, when it would be published. The situation has not changed since I answered the last question.
§ Mr. PowellCan the Minister state, or if it is inconvenient to do so verbally would he put a statement in the Library showing, which, if any, of the items on the agenda are matters which have been put forward by the Scrutiny Committee for discussion and decision in this House? Will he in any case renew the undertaking that Her Majesty's Ministers will not commit themselves on any such matter prior to such decision?
§ Mr. HattersleyThe undertaking which was given during the right hon. Gentleman's absence about the Government's attitude to the Scrutiny Committee of course holds good. That is that the Scrutiny Committee exists to fill the vacuum which might exist in this House about Community legislation and to ensure that the rights of this House are preserved so far as Community legislation and related matters are concerned. The assurances given by the Foreign Secretary and by the Leader of the House of course continue from one Parliament to the next. As for which of the matters I have announced today are decided by the Scrutiny Committee as appropriate for debate, that might be a long list. Either I or the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee, when the Committee is formed and the chairman appointed, will, I am sure, be prepared to get in touch with the right hon. Gentleman.
But I assure the right hon. Gentleman —I think that the Chairman of the "old" Scrutiny Committee, if I may so describe it, will confirm my judgment—that the Government are anxious to ensure that, 692 wherever possible—that is, virtually on every occasion—the Government will wait to take decisions in the Community until the Scrutiny Committee has examined the proposal and the House has had the opportunity to debate it. That is not always the case; sometimes, for instance with agriculture, there is fast-moving business in which the interests of this country require a quick decision. But the Government are determined that the Scrutiny Committee, and through it this House, should have their proper rights over Community legislation.
§ Mr. John MendelsonWith reference to the House having an opportunity to debate these matters, and referring back to the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrewshire, West (Mr. Buchan), who had considerable inside experience of these matters in the immediate past, would the Minister agree that the sugar agreement proposed is of such long-term and far-reaching proportions that, if the Australian offer is not further discussed and if the House never has an opportunity to weigh the two proposed agreements in the balance, it will be impossible for five years to return to the Australian proposals? Is it not therefore essential, if he wants the House to debate these matters before final judgments are made, that the Government should come to this House and allow a debate on the proposed sugar agreement before the Minister of Agriculture commits this country for five years?
§ Mr. HattersleyMy hon. Friend must not tempt me to argue the merits of the Community proposals in a business statement, which simply describes what the Councils of Ministers will be discussing in the forthcoming month, nor must he tempt me to re-examine and redefine the terms of the Scrutiny Committee, which is not—if I may use a contentious adjective —a monitoring committee to examine the Government's attitude towards the Community as a whole. It is a Committee which examines the legislative proposals that come from Brussels and Luxembourg on legislative matters. If my hon. Friend simply wants a debate on the sugar arrangement proposed by my right hon. Friend, he should propose that to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, not through me during discussion of a business statement on EEC matters.
§ Mr. PriorWith reference to the Minister's previous answer about fast-moving business in agriculture needing quick decisions, can he now ensure that the Minister of Agriculture has placed on the agenda the need for the immediate introduction of either a guarantee for beef or, failing that, putting intervention into the market straight away, as farmers and housewives in Britain cannot wait until March for this to happen?
§ Mr. HattersleyAs I said earlier, and as my right hon. Friend said last week, I have no doubt that the sort of policy which my right hon. Friend believes is necessary to improve the beef régime within the Community will be discussed at the Council of Ministers' meeting.
§ Mr. Frank AllaunDid not the Minister say that the date on which the British people will decide will be October 1975? Is not that rather different from saying, as has been said up to now, that we would decide within 12 months? Is he aware that many of us on the Government side of the House see no reason to wait yet another 12 months before a decision is taken, particularly as negotiations started after the General Election of February of this year?
§ Mr. HattersleyIf it were different from what has been said up to now, it certainly was not intended to be, but in case my hon. Friend still has doubts let me assure him that all of us believe that there is every case for concluding these renegotiations as speedily as possible. My hon. Friend and I want it; I believe the Labour Party wants it; it is in the interests of Great Britain; and I am sure that the EEC wants it. My right hon. Friend's policy is to conclude the ministerial stage of the renegotiations as quickly as possible, and then for the matter to be put to the British people at the first opportunity.
§ Mr. TugendhatDoes not the Minister agree that he has skated rather quickly over the business of Community countries borrowing money from Arab States? Does he agree that this matter is more important than the sugar agreement, both in terms of binding this country into the Community and in terms of foreign policy in our dealings with the Arab countries? When does he expect that the House will have an opportunity to discuss the matter? Can he say what 694 the attitude of the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be during the discussions with the Community?
§ Mr. HattersleyIf I may paraphrase an answer that is given mostly on Thursday afternoons, that is not a subject which is to be discussed next month.
§ Mr. SpearingWill my hon. Friend confirm that it would be possible for the Foreign Secretary to raise the question of the 1.4 million tons of cane suger and that the standing orders of the Council of Foreign Ministers do not prevent that? Is he aware that the bankable assurances that we were given by the right hon. and learned Member for Hexham (Mr. Rippon) have consistently bounced and that unless they are cashed soon future supplies for the housewife, production from the Third World and the interests of the sugar refining population will be put at risk?
§ Mr. HattersleyIt is certainly possible for the Foreign Secretary to raise the matter of the 1.4 million tons guarantee at the Ministers' meeting, and I assure my hon. Friend that he will do so. I shall not be tempted into discussing the merits of the matter as that is not my rôle this afternoon.
§ Mr. HurdCan the Minister assure us that the Government are pressing hard for the provision of a Community regional fund? Some of us are a little surprised about the lassitude of his right hon. Friend on this subject since February. Is not that particularly surprising now, when the prospect in our regions is of rising unemployment?
§ Mr. HattersleyI fear that the hon. Gentleman must be getting reports from Brussels which are, shall I say, coloured in one way or another. My right hon. Friend and the entire Government are determined that there shall be a regional policy in the Community if we remain within it—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—which meets the needs of British industry and the British people. My right hon. Friend and the entire Government are pressing towards that end. That is our duty and obligation.
§ Mr. JayMay we have a much fuller statement than we have yet had by the Government to the House of the terms of the sugar agreement, including the details of the offer made by Australia?
§ Mr. HattersleyThe Leader of the House, who is at present on the Front Bench, has, I am sure, noted that request and will pass it to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture. This is essentially not a matter for me but for my right hon. Friend.
§ Mr. MartenBefore 18th November will the Minister tell his right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture of the deep concern of all parts of the House at the shocking delay in coming to an agreement about sugar from the developing countries? There is great anxiety here and in the developing countries that the Common Market must get on with this matter.
§ Mr. HattersleyI am sure that we are as aware as is the hon. Gentleman of the need for confirming the 1.4 million tons arrangement and undertaking. The last thing that I want to do on these occasions is to make political points, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will understand that in the earlier discussions on this matter we discovered that the "bankable assurances" for 1.4 million tons were neither as bankable nor as firm as we had been led to believe. We are beginning from a first-base position on the matter. We shall continue to press it and to insist that the 1.4 million tons is part of Community policy.
§ Mr. SkinnerWill my hon. Friend answer the question why it is necessary to send another batch of legislation affecting the Common Market upstairs, rather than have it debated in the Chamber? When he also says, almost in the same breath, that a decision will be made by the British people very shortly, and especially as the House is generally noted for taking a "wait-and-see" policy before it takes rash decisions, why has the House taken a rash decision to shove all this legislation upstairs in this instance?
§ Mr. HattersleyI understand that no firm decision has yet been made on the point that my hon. Friend raises. The questions raised about the procedures of the House are essentially not for me but for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me for saying so, but he, like me, rejoiced at the size and scope of the Queen's Speech and at the legislative timetable that we face over the next 12 months, and, therefore, we must face some of the penalties involved.
§ Mr. CrouchThe Minister has told us of an immense amount of business activity emanating from Brussels at the Council of Ministers. Does he not feel that he is less than adequately served by his party, which has refused to support him and the Government by sending a delegation to the European Parliament?
§ Mr. HattersleyI have made my position on this matter very clear on previous occasions, and I am happy to repeat it. In previous years I have voted in private meetings for participation by the Labour Party in that assembly, but now I believe that were we to take part in that assembly it would make our renegotiations, which are serious and firm, a good deal less than that. I am sure that we are right to maintain our position until we have determined whether we should or should not remain in the Community.
May I also take this opportunity of correcting an error I made in reply to an earlier question. I told the hon. Member for City of London and Westminster, South (Mr. Tugendhat) that the Finance Ministers would not discuss the Arab loan. I think that the hon. Gentleman regretted that that did not show appropriate urgency. I hope that he will forgive my error in saying that they would not discuss it when in fact they will, and will congratulate them on showing urgency, which I did not represent.
§ Mr. MolloyNotwithstanding my hon. Friend's ingenuity, the original statement that he had to make this afternoon was frightening in so far as it was almost indicative of a bureaucratic nightmare. If what he has had to do today is a sample of the sort of thing that we shall have if we are silly enough to stay in the Common Market, does not that lead him to the view that the sooner we get out the better? Will my hon. Friend convey to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture the grave feeling in the House about the current situation and the fact that it may get worse unless we are provided with an opportunity to debate what he apparently concluded in Brussels without the permission of the House of Commons?
§ Mr. HattersleyI think that the feelings of the House about the sugar deal 697 are well documented, and I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture will take note of them. My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy) referred to what I described in my statement as a "bureaucratic nightmare". In a peculiar way, what I described is a democratic nightmare, in that elected representatives, members of Governments of the Community—will go through, in great detail, decisions which, frankly, the Government and, perhaps, the Parliament of this country would not feel were right for consideration by elected representatives. In fact, the process I have covered today is essentially democratic.