§ Q2. Mr. Dormandasked the Prime Minister if she will state her official engagements for 27 April.
§ The Prime MinisterThis morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall have further meetings later today.
§ Mr. DormandIs the right hon. Lady aware that the belligerence that she has shown in the past two days misjudges not only the critical situation in the Falkland Islands but the mood of the British people? I do not in any way underrate the many difficulties and problems involved, but does the right hon. Lady agree that at this stage what is required above all else is a rapid 722 intensification and widening of economic sanctions, particularly through the agencies of the United Nations? At the same time, will she make it clear to President Reagan, in straight talking, that his neutralism will not be forgotten in this country?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not believe that we have misjudged the views of our citizens over the Falkland Islands. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will remember, too, that there are many British citizens living under occupation on the Falkland Islands. He will be as anxious as I am to see that they are not under that occupation for a moment longer than is necessary. The easiest way to achieve that is for the Argentines to withdraw their forces. They broke the peace first.
§ Mr. ColvinReference has been made to the attitude of the British people. They are resolutely behind my right hon. Friend. My question refers to the attitude of the Argentines. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the full resources of our propaganda machine are being mobilised so that the Argentines are aware of the real truth of the situation and are not being force-fed lies by their military dictators?
§ The Prime MinisterWe are doing as much as we possibly can, especially through the BBC external services, to put out the facts of the situation. I cannot say how often they are heard in the Argentine.
§ Mr. BennIs it not clear from the Prime Minister's statements yesterday and today, and from the "Panorama" interview last night, that the Government never had the slightest intention of using the United Nations for the purpose of negotiation, or of negotiating directly under resolution 502, and that it was always the Prime Minister's intention that there should be only a military expedition? Is it not clear, to that extent, that she has hitherto grossly misled the House and the country?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is talking nonsense. I suspect that he knows it. The Government went immediately, the day after the invasion, to the Security Council, gained the support of many other nations and secured the passage of that resolution. It is over three weeks since that resolution was passed. It has not been complied with. On the other hand, Argentina has continued to make the situation worse. We want a peaceful settlement. The easiest way to achieve that is for the Argentines to withdraw their troops.
§ Sir Paul BryanAs the rights and wrongs of the dispute have already been established by international law and supported by the Security Council, is not three weeks about as long a period of intense negotiation as can be justified if both parties are negotiating in good faith?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend is right. Not only have three weeks passed, but during that time the Argentines have put more and more reinforcements on the islands, which shows that they do not intend to comply with the resolution. As we have been saying recently, and as Mr. Haig has been saying, time is running out, because the military options in that part of the world must have regard to the weather and climatic conditions. We still require a peaceful settlement, and we can get one if the Argentines are willing to have it.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. David Steel.
§ Mr. David Steelrose—
§ Mr. FootMay I ask the Prime Minister these further questions? Will she publish as speedily as possible the timing and exact wording of the reply given by our ambassador to the Secretary-General's statement, so that we can all see what was said on behalf of our country? Will she reconsider what I have said about the Foreign Secretary going to New York? If the case is as good as she says, why should not our Foreign Secretary go to New York and state it there? That is what I ask for. If the right hon. Lady does not respond to my request she will do great injury to our country in the eyes of the whole world. As we act in this matter only under the United Nations charter, I urge the right hon. Lady to accept that the advice that I am giving her is in the best interests of the country as a whole.
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that there is a formal reply to such a message. Various views are expressed informally, but it is not a formal reply. Formal reports are given by our ambassador to the United Nations, as they must be, about article 51 and the precise action that we have taken. We have full details of that. I stress to the right hon. Gentleman that resolution 502 is mandatory. Unfortunately, the United Nations does not enforce it and has no means of enforcing it. Therefore, we can only bring the best possible pressure to bear on the Argentine to enforce it.
As the right hon. Gentleman may have heard our ambassador say this morning from New York, there is no disposition there at the moment to return to the United Nations so long as Mr. Haig's peace initiative is in play. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has recently returned from Washington. I do not think that he could achieve anything by going to New York now.
§ Mr. FootDoes the right hon. Lady's reply to me mean—I can construe it only in this way—that there is to be no official reply on behalf of her Majesty's Government to the appeal from the Secretary-General?
§ The Prime MinisterI can make an official reply if the right hon. Gentleman wishes. It will not be any different from what I have said, because the governing factor in United Nations law—I use the word "law"—and in international law is the resolution of the Security Council. The only possible thing that one can call upon the Secretary-General to do is to implement it. The only thing that I call upon the right hon. Gentleman to do is to use all his powers and influence with the Argentine Government to implement it.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. In view of the time, most exceptionally I intend to call the Leader of the Liberal Party. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] I shall tell the House why. It is because I believe in fair play.
§ Mr. David SteelThank you, Mr. Speaker. The record will show that you called me before the time ran out. I gave way to the Leader of the Opposition. Will the Prime Minister clarify two matters? Were the proposals that the Foreign Secretary brought back from Washington commended to the Government by Mr. Haig? Have the Government made a detailed response to those proposals?
§ The Prime MinisterThe proposals do not yet have the status of formal proposals. They are still discussions. We have let Secretary Haig know our views, but my right lion. Friend did that while he was still in Washington.
§ Mr. HoyleOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the news blackout on the Falkland Islands situation, which might mean that our troops have landed there, should not the Prime Minister make a statement on the matter?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. It is unfair for someone who is trying to make a political point to raise it on a point of order.