HC Deb 05 May 1976 vol 910 cc1299-304
Mr. Pym

(by Private Notice )asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the protection of the British fishing fleet in the seas around Iceland.

The Minister of State for Defence (Mr. William Rodgers)

As the House knows, the Royal Navy was first sent to the fishing grounds off Iceland last November. Royal Navy and RAF protection was then withdrawn for a short period during the discussions between my right hon. Friend the former Prime Minister and the Prime Minister of Iceland at the end of January. It was resumed when no settlement was reached and harassment by Icelandic gunboats continued.

For the most part, Royal Navy protection has proved very effective. No trawlers have been arrested and in the period 28th February to 21st April, for example, only one trawler had its warps cut.

However, Icelandic gunboats have recently adopted new and particularly dangerous tactics, resulting in serious damage to a number of Royal Navy ships and a much increased prospect of loss of life. For the first time there have been as many as six gunboats deployed on the grounds simultaneously, and they have been particularly favoured by weather conditions. In responding to their aggressive and dangerous behaviour we have had to bear in mind our wish to avoid escalatory action which might prejudice the chances of a peaceful settlement or increase the risk to both British and Icelandic lives.

We believe that the present level of protection continues to be of value to our trawlers, but in view of representations received from the industry we are considering whether further steps should now be taken.

Mr. Pym

I thank the Minister for that reply. Will he accept that the House and the whole industry have been unstinting in their praise for the Royal Navy's work in enabling our fishermen to go about their legitimate work? Does the Minister's answer mean that from the point of view of the Navy there has been no change and no reduction in the level of naval protection but that the change has come wholly on the Icelandic side?

Are the fishermen being kept fully informed of the position and what the Navy is doing, and are they entirely happy about the protection arrangements at present? What exactly was the decision that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food yesterday said would be taken in the next 24 or 48 hours? I do not think that the House is clear about that.

Will the Minister say something about the present state of negotiations to settle the position, which clearly is the desire of the whole House? Does he realise that what the House wants is to be satisfied about the adequacy of protection and its continuation for the safety of our fishermen fishing in those waters?

Mr. Rodgers

First, I am sure that the Royal Navy will greatly appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman has said about its efforts since it first went in, in November. The industry has made clear to myself and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, for example, that, far from having any criticism of the Royal Navy, the trawlermen are very pleased indeed and fully appreciate the very hazardous circumstances in which the Royal Navy has been operating.

On the right hon. Gentleman's last point, the answer is "Yes". Indeed, we accept that the House is and must be deeply concerned with the level and effectiveness of protection and that we have an obligation to seek to provide it for our fishermen fishing quite legally off Iceland at present.

As to the right hon. Gentleman's particular questions, there is certainly no reduction in the level of Royal Navy protection, nor has there been any change in the rules of engagement, but in view of the changed Icelandic tactics it was necessary to consider how best to protect lives and to enable our frigates to continue a useful protection rôle. It is that change which has given rise to the situation that we see now.

The fishermen off Iceland have been kept informed. I think it would be true to say that there is very close integration on the ground between the trawler-men and the Royal Navy. To say that they are happy about the present level of protection would be untrue. They are concerned by the fact that their catches in recent times have been small. It was for that reason that the industry made representations to my right hon. Friend and to myself and colleagues yesterday.

As for the decision within 48 hours, the burden of what the industry said was that, whereas it fully appreciated the protection that the Navy had given and it understood present problems, it wished us to consider again whether the level of protection—I am thinking in terms not mainly of numbers but of tactics also—could be raised. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture told the trawler-men on the fields yesterday that within 48 hours—in other words, by the end of tomorrow—a decision on the level of protection would be made.

As for the negotiations, the negotiations in Brussels yesterday that were carried out by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs were concerned with the broader issues of fisheries policies. He made a statement there, which was widely reported this morning, and I am sure that he would be willing to place a copy in the Library.

Mr. James Johnson

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the fleet must stay there and fish, otherwise our case inevitably must go by default? Speaking personally, I do not want Iceland to win its "phony" case, but, even more so as the Hull Member of Parliament, I do not want my constituents in a dole queue outside the Hull exchange. Finally, does my right. hon. Friend agree that while the vessel owners may be losing money, the possibilities are that men could lose their lives? Therefore, will he give the House, clearly and unequivocally, an assurance on behalf of himself and his colleagues that the Government will give as much protection as possible at this time and no less protection than they gave to our men a month ago?

Mr. Rodgers

My hon. Friend very fairly sums up the situation. I entirely agree with him that it is very important that our fishing fleet should stay off Iceland. My latest information is that the trawlers that were there yesterday are still in the area. I hope very much that they will remain there until we are able to send them a further message by the end of tomorrow.

My hon. Friend draws attention to the importance of the fishing industry and to fishing off Iceland to very many people in Britain at present. This is an extremely difficult question of finding a balance between affording adequate protection and trying to avoid the loss of human life. The Royal Navy has succeeded in this, but we are considering whether some changes in the form or level of protection might enable the balance to be struck perhaps rather more effectively than it seems to have been struck in recent weeks.

Mr. Donald Stewart

Is the Minister aware that the case for using the Royal Navy in Icelandic waters is extremely weak and that in view of the Government's virtual acceptance of an extension of the limits it becomes almost indefensible? If he has vessels to use in that way. why are they not used in protecting Scottish waters, where the protection fleet has been cut by half in recent years?

Mr. Rodgers

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's views, and on this and many others matters his case is weak and very unrepresentative of the feeling in the House. I wish that he would be less small-minded and would recognise how important this fishing is to the people of other parts of the United Kingdom. believe that we would all be ready to afford as much necessary protection to the fishermen of Scotland as I hope he believes we should afford to our fishermen off Iceland today.

Mr. Amery

Is the Minister aware that there is a widespread impression growing, and reflected in the Press this morning, that the Royal Navy is no longer able to assure, for technical reasons, the protection of our trawler-men? Does he appreciate how serious it would be if this proved to be so? Can he say that that is not the case?

Mr. Rodgers

It is not the case that the Royal Navy is failing to afford a protection rôle to our trawlers off Iceland. There has always been great difficulty in finding a balance between the form and level of protection and avoiding loss of life and the escalation of what is a very delicate and dangerous situation. In so far as our protection may be thought to have been less in the last few weeks, that is the matter Ministers are collectively considering today.

Mr. Brotherton

Bearing in mind that many of my constituents are going about their lawful occasions on the high seas in northern waters, can the Minister repeat the guarantee given to me in this House in February by his right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) that the Navy will continue to defend our mariners who are going about their lawful occasions on the high seas until an arrangement or agreement is reached with the Icelandic Government?

Mr. Rodgers

I can certainly give the House that undertaking, but I hope the hon. Member will allow that these problems are highly complex. Apart from protecting trawlermen pursuing their lawful occasions, we must also seek to protect the lives of sailors in the Royal Navy in particularly difficult circumstances.