United States (Discussions) (Hansard, 20 October 1982)

§ 4. Mr. Canavan
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what subjects he expects to discuss at his next meeting with representatives of the United States Government.

§ Mr. Pym
I met the United States Secretary of State for bilateral talks in New York on 28 September. I have no plans for a further meeting with representatives of the United States Administration in the immediate future, although I shall continue to keep in regular contact with the Americans. The agenda of any meeting would depend on the circumstances at the time.

§ Mr. Canavan
Is it not about time that the British Government adopted a tougher line over American policies which are a threat to jobs in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom—for example, the Siberian pipeline sanctions and the threat of penal duties being imposed tomorrow on British Steel Corporation exports?
Will the British Government stand up and fight for the interests of British steel workers with the same determination as Ronald Reagan stands up and fights for the interests of the American steel barons?

§ Mr. Pym
As the hon. Gentleman knows, negotiations on steel have endured now for some weeks. They have 351 been undertaken by the Community on behalf of all member countries, and the hope is that it will be possible for an agreement to be signed tomorrow. I cannot tell the House at the moment whether that will be possible. It is under consideration today by, amongst others, the German Government. I hope that that agreement will be achieved, but we must wait and see. If it is, the consequences for the British steel industry will be significantly less serious than they would be otherwise. We have been active in the negotiations.
With regard to the pipeline dispute, I have taken a positive view from the start and done everything possible to begin talks and negotiations that would enable sanctions to be lifted. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that they are damaging British firms and jobs. It is not the right way for the Alliance to take action against the Soviet Union, for whatever reason. I can only say that I have taken part in many meetings. I have used every endeavour, and am continuing to do so, to achieve a positive result. There are some hopeful signs, but, as yet, no success.

§ Mr. Renton
Are not our chances of obtaining a softening of the American position over steel imports greater as a member of the European Community than standing by ourselves? Are there not signs that the American Adminstration are seeking a way out of the impasse on the Siberian gas pipeline? What can my right hon. Friend do to improve the situation and encourage a solution?

§ Mr. Pym
Whereas some hon. Members believe that it will be easier to negotiate on our own, few people in the industry agree. Certainly the Community believes that the argument is infinitely stronger if it is done on a Community basis. That is why we agreed to do that.
Secondly, everyone—I believe the United States as well—is looking for a way for the sanctions to be lifted. I am doing what I can to help in that direction. There are some favourable signs, but as yet we have not seen the outcome that I would regard as satisfactory.

§ Mr. Healey
On steel, if the European Community reaches a common position today, as we all hope, and the Americans fail to respond to it, will the right hon. Gentleman take the initiative in seeking European retaliation against any American sanctions on European steel?
Secondly, many of us will have read with great concern President Reagan's statement yesterday that he will give up sanctions on the pipeline only if his allies can reach agreement on more severe ways of punishing the Soviet Union for what is happening in Poland. Will he tell the United States that this type of economic pressure on the Soviet Union will have absolutely no impact whatever on what happens in Poland and that he is not prepared to trade a deal on the pipeline issue in return for sanctions against the Soviet Union in other spheres that have no economic or political justification?
May I put a third question? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Oh yes, I will. I know of Mr. Speaker's deep concern about freedon of speech in this House despite—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The right hon. Gentleman touches a tender chord. If everyone asks three questions, we shall be in difficulty, but he can ask his third question.

§ Mr. Healey
As always, Mr. Speaker, I bow to your superior wisdom.
352 Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that the Government will sign the law of the sea treaty, despite the attempt by the American Administration to seek agreement not to sign by countries that believe it to be a very good thing?

§ Mr. Pym
It would be wrong of me, and I do not intend to do so, to anticipate the possibility of failure to reach agreement tomorrow in the steel talks. The importance of reaching that agreement is very clear to us, and we have used our influence to try to ensure that there is such an agreement.
On the pipeline, there is at present no question of trading anything. We have been looking at the context of East-West trade and the economic relationship between East and West. We have opened up a wide area of discussion on that important strategic matter, of which the pipeline issue is but one example.
On UNLOSC, the Government are still considering the implications of this far-reaching agreement, and we have not yet reached a conclusion about signature.