§ 38. Mr. Teddy Taylorasked the Lord Privy Seal what progress has been made in seeking to achieve reforms in the structure and policies of the European Economic Community.
§ 34. Mr. Leightonasked the Lord Privy Seal what progress Mer Majesty's Government has made in the reform of the European Economic Community.
§ Sir Ian GilmourThe agreement reached on 30 May 1980 which limited Britain's net contribution to the budget 272 was a first step towards more comprehensive changes. The commitment which we secured on 30 May was to an examination of Community policies, aimed at preventing the recurrence of unacceptable situations. This provides a major opportunity to achieve structural reforms. The Commission is to submit proposals by the end of June 1981 and in the meantime we have been continuing informal contacts with the Commission and with our Community partners.
§ Mr. TaylorOn the subject of the agreement, is the Minister aware that, of the £470 million due to Britain in rebates for projects by 31 March, which is only six weeks away, by yesterday only £157 million had been paid, according to a Written Answer that I had from the Chancellor of the Exchequer? What action will the Government take if those rebates are delayed, as is threatened, by a senior minister in the German Government?
§ Sir Ian GilmourWe have recently received some £210 million under the financial mechanism in January and a further £60 million under the supplementary measures scheme. We had received £98 million in December. A further charge of some £300 million under the supplementary measures scheme is expected before 31 March. I have no reason whatever to believe that those refunds will not be here on time.
§ Mr. Russell JohnstonDoes the Minister agree that necessary reforms in European Community policies include the more effective development of such common policies as regional development and social development?
§ Sir Ian GilmourI entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. That has long been our policy.
§ Mr. JayBut have the British Government yet put forward specific proposals for the reform of the common agricultural policy?
§ Sir Ian GilmourNo, we have not, because I do not think that that is the right way to go about it. I am aware of the right hon. Gentleman's well-known views on this subject. The fact is that the Commission will put forward proposals. Clearly, we feed in our ideas to everybody concerned, but just to put forward comprehensive proposals would not be the right way to achieve our interest.
§ Mr. Nicholas WintertonDoes my right hon. Friend agree that in seeking to review policies within the EEC it would be very helpful if the EEC as a whole could play a greater part in resolving the problems of the Middle East and the establishment of a Palestinian State? Will he ensure that the EEC and each country within it co-operate in order to bring pressure upon the United States, which is the linchpin in maintaining the State of Israel in occupation of territories that it took over in the 1967 war?
§ Sir Ian GilmourWe were discussing these matters earlier. My hon. Friend will be aware of the European initiative and the Venice declarations. The Dutch Presidency is pressing on with that initiative. Mr. van der Klaauw will be leaving for the Middle East in a few days' time. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of this question.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesDoes the Lord Privy Seal agree that the budget compromise of 30 May specifically rules out any basic change in the principles of the budget and 273 the common agricultural policy? Is he aware that the British Government have therefore lost any chance that they had of pressing for fundamental reforms and that at the end of the day, when the review is completed, all that we shall have will be another cosmetic compromise which does nothing to remove the harmful effects of British membership of the EEC?
§ Sir Ian GilmourThe right hon. Gentleman goes on saying these things and pays no attention at all to the facts. He must be well aware that the principles of the common agricultural policy are perfectly all right. It is to their application that we have objections. He will see from article 39 of the Treaty that the principles are totally unexceptionable. The 30 May agreement contained the undertaking or the agreement to avoid unacceptable situations recurring. Therefore, there will be a fundamental review and the Commission will be putting forward its proposals within a few months.
§ Mr. AmeryWhile not dissenting at all from the need to reform the CAP, does my right hon. Friend accept that in a hungry world it is much better to have a surplus than a shortage? Will he bear that in mind in guiding our approach to the problem?
§ Sir Ian GilmourI entirely agree with my right hon. Friend that a surplus is much better than a shortage. Certainly, Poland and the Soviet Union would be more pleased to have Common Market surpluses than the deficits from which they suffer.
§ Mr. SpriggsWill the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the reply that he gave in relation to proposed changes in the CAP, because when the referendum campaign was under way we, as opponents to entry into the Common Market, were told that it was better to change the CAP policy from within and that the sooner we joined the better? Why does the right hon. Gentleman now tell the House that that is not the way to change the CAP?
§ Sir Ian GilmourI do not think that I said that. With respect, I think that the hon. Gentleman has misunderstood me. I said that I did not think the right way to proceed was for us to put forward publicly detailed proposals to reform the CAP. They would merely be picked to bits by other people. In any event, the initial proposals should come from the Commission.