§ 41. Mr. Moateasked the Lord Privy Seal what is his latest programme for securing completion of negotiations on fundamental reforms within the European Economic Community.
§ Mr. Humphrey AtkinsWe are seeking to make as rapid progress as possible, with the aim of reaching appropriate conclusions at the European Council later this month in London, in accordance with the decision of the June European Council.
§ Mr. MoateHas not my right hon. Friend inherited a disappointing lack of progress in securing fundamental reform of the common agricultural policy and of the budget? The Government are committed to such reform. Is it not time that the Government found some new political impetus to ensure that we secure those fundamental changes in the foreseeable future?
§ Mr. AtkinsWe are constantly doing that.
§ Mr. CryerIs not the reality that fundamental changes can be made only through unanimous agreement and that because of vested interests in the Common Market—such as France's interest in the CAP—that unanimity will never be reached? Therefore, fundamental reform is impossible and the Government are pursuing an illusion.
§ Mr. AtkinsI always knew that the hon. Gentleman was a pessimist, but I did not realise that he was such a pessimist. He should not be.
§ Mr. LathamCould not one fundamental reform be to stop dealing with items such as the gas subsidies for Dutch growers at such a snail's pace? Could we not get on and solve that problem as quickly as possible?
§ Mr. AtkinsEverybody agrees that we want speedy solutions for all the problems that come our way. We seek to achieve such solutions. However, when one has to discuss such problems with people who have other interests, they take a little longer to solve than some people would wish.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesIs it not the case that the ill-fated budget compromise in 1980 distinctly excluded all fundamental reforms? Is it not true that no progress has been made because the other countries are not interested in a solution? That shows the folly of accepting that temporary agreement in 1980.
§ Mr. AtkinsI was interested—as I know all hon. Members were—to hear the right hon. Gentleman describe that decision as foolish, when it has benefited Britain to the tune of £.1.5 billion. The right hon. Gentleman has overlooked the fact that at the same time the Heads of Government concerned agreed that permanent solutions should be sought. That is precisely what we are doing.