HC Deb 11 May 1983 vol 42 cc780-2
47. Mr. Joan Evans

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects progress on the budget of the European Community.

52. Mr. Knox

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about progress towards reaching agreement on European Community finances.

Mr. Pym

The Commission last week published its proposals for the long-term reform of the Community's financing system. Foreign Ministers will discuss these proposals, and the solution of the immediate budgetary problem facing Britain, at their informal meeting on 14 and 15 May and at the Foreign Affairs Council on 24 May in accordance with the remit given by the European Council in March.

Mr. Evans

Does the Secretary of State agree that as we are going into the general election and as the future budget contributions are to be discussed at Stuttgart on 6 and 7 June, there will be no agreement on a permanent solution? Will he confirm that our net contribution to the budget since we joined has cost us £6 billion and that we have been contributing £1 million for every day since we have been in the Market?

Mr. Pym

Nobody thinks that there will be anything like an agreement on a long-term solution by the time of the Stuttgart meeting on 6 and 7 June. Everybody in the Community recognises that it will take a number of months to settle that. Progress has already been made, but the debate has only just begun and everybody recognises that it will take some time. For that reason, it is necessary to have separate arrangements for the United Kingdom budget in 1983. Discussions on that will begin informally at the weekend meeting to which I referred and will carry on in the Foreign Affairs Council on 24 May.

Mr. Knox

Does my right hon. Friend agree that a commitment to join the exchange rate mechanism of the EMS could be helpful in enabling us to resolve our budgetary difficulties, quite apart from its other advantages?

Mr. Pym

That is debatable. A number of my hon. Friends and others believe that that would be helpful, but Her Majesty's Government have come to the conclusion that so far, at any rate, it would not be to our advantage to join.

Mr. Maclennan

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that the Government's failure to secure a settlement of the agriculture budget is costing British farmers dearly with every passing week and that, in particular, the sheep farmers have already lost £600,000? When does the right hon. Gentleman expect to get the agriculture settlement fixed?

Mr. Pym

When everybody agrees. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been fighting a doughty battle in the interests of Britain and, had it not been for him, I have no doubt that there would have been an even more expensive settlement than the one that we shall get when he finally achieves agreement. I have every confidence that he will achieve agreement.

Mr. Squire

If, for some reason or another, in the next few weeks my right hon. Friend were to be challenged on our budget contribution, would he undertake to make clear, first, the massive distinction between the performance on the budget of the Labour party when in Government and that of this Government, and, secondly and most importantly, that unlike the Labour party, this party has made a purpose of working within Europe to get agreements along the line for this country, and has not run away from its responsibilities?

Mr. Pym

My hon. Friend makes a valid distinction between the two parties and their approach to this difficult problem. Had it not been for my predecessor, the noble Lord Carrington, and the Prime Minister, I do not think that we should have been able to negotiate a refund of over £2,000 million in the lifetime of this Parliament. That is a much better position than would otherwise have existed and is certainly much better than that which we inherited from our predecessors.

Mr. Heffer

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that on every occasion that my right hon. and hon. Friends attempted to get a better deal they were attacked by the then Opposition Front Bench? We were accused by the Tory party of being too abrasive and undermining Britain's position in the Common Market. The difference between the two Governments is that on any occasion on which this Government have tried to make some progress they have received the full support of the Opposition. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister said that she would get an agreement by June? Is it not clear that there will not be an agreement by June, and is it not a good idea for the right hon. Lady not to bother to go to Stuttgart but to wait until after the election, when we shall have won and can begin the process of getting out of the Community?

Mr. Pym

In the last Parliament when the Conservatives were in Opposition, we used to accuse the then Government, and the hon. Gentleman who was part of it, of getting nowhere when they went to Europe. They did not get anywhere. The hon. Gentleman talked of abrasiveness, but we have achieved an extremely helpful refund. As for the statement about the time of the Stuttgart Council, I can only remind the hon. Gentleman of the decision of the European Council in March at Brussels, which was that the European Council in Stuttgart in June would receive a report from the Foreign Affairs Council about progress made towards achieving a settlement.