§ Mr. Nicholas Baker (Dorset, North)I am grateful for the opportunity of raising the important subject of the treatment of British expatriates working abroad, particularly in Nigeria and Libya.
I propose to raise a number of individual cases which are significant, but the subject is of general importance, because the growth of international trade that we hope to see will mean that there will be more expatriates working overseas. The protection of their rights and assets will remain a matter of the greatest concern to us and the responsiblity of the Foreign Office.
I am delighted to see that my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton), the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, is to reply to the debate. I congratulate him on holding his office with such great distinction. I recall that many years ago I was one of a group of 15 people being interviewed. One of us was to be chosen and the process involved a long group discussion to which we all contributed. Many brash, excitable, enthusiastic young voices rushed into the discussion, eager to put forward their views.
My hon. Friend made no contribution until about two thirds of the way through the discussion when, in three sentences, he demonstrated that he had grasped the subject and seen the flaws in the arguments of others and put forward a carefully thought out, constructive approach of his own. He was chosen and his career has not looked back since. I have every reason to suppose that this debate will follow the same pattern and I look forward to the pearls of wisdom that my hon. Friend will utter.
Many thousands of British expatriates work abroad, many for foreign-owned companies, many for British companies and some for multinational companies, which often receive a bad press, but are an important link in the economic chain that binds the developing and developed worlds to each other. Some expatriates work for Governments or governmental agencies.
It would be surprising and regrettable if, as international trade grows, the number of expatriates working abroad did not increase. I believe that the number will increase. I pay tribute to the energy and enterprise of those people who do work that is of the greatest service not only to the British economy, but to the economies of the developing world.
Newly independent countries of the Third world are often sensitive about expatriates and are not uniformly welcoming. Some, like Nigeria, are the beneficiaries of immense natural resources. However meandering the present economic path of Nigeria may seem to us, its resources will be developed and exploited, with help from outside. Naturally, I hope that the help that Nigeria receives will continue to come from people in this country.
All countries of the Third world wish and need to develop their own economies. They look first for the most basic resource, which is food. In the end, aid must gradually give way to trade, and most of those countries want assistance in developing their agriculture. I recall the Christian Aid advertisement of some years ago
Give a man a fish and you give him lunch for today; give him a fishing rod and you give him lunch for his life.Those of us who were burdened with a classical education recall our astonishment to find that once upon a time the 696 land between the Tigris and the Euphrates was fertile. Once upon a time Sicily was the corn centre of the civilised European world. Parts of Africa that are now desert or bush produced food. Undoubtedly there are large parts of the developing world where, with irrigation and the necessary agricultural skills, deserts could be made to bloom.I believe that it will be increasingly the role of Western industrial countries to provide the necessary management, advice and services to make that happen. The work of the United Nations agencies alone is quite insufficient for that purpose. Whether aid is given bilaterally or multilaterally, project work must continue to expand, just as trading contacts must do. More expatriates working in Third world countries will result, however those developments take place.
I am not advocating or prophesying a revival of colonialism. Twenty-six years ago I served in what was then Tanganyika, preparing for independence under the guiding hand of the United Kingdom. I pointed out then that it would be in the interests of Tanganyikans for the connection between that country, Britain and the EEC to remain close. Sadly, the progress of that country since then has illustrated how much the skills and resources necessary to develop Tanzania's agriculture are lacking in that depressed economy.
It is essential that Third world countries recognise that the development of trade and aid will involve the work of expatriates, and that that is very much a two-way process. Just as expatriates must respect the laws of the host country and must adapt to local conditions, so the host country, too, must see that the basic rights of individuals are not infringed. The host country has an interest in protecting such individuals, whether they are buying, selling, constructing or maintaining. Expatriates from western industrial countries will play an increasingly important part in the development of the economies of Third world countries if the aspirations of their citizens are to be fulfilled.
On the other hand, the Foreign Office has a direct responsibility for expatriates and must be robust in protecting their interests, seeing that they are well briefed and provided with all necessary assistance. The Foreign Office today is at last adjusting to the changed relationships between developing and developed countries, and is recognising that trade is a vital part of the business of the Foreign Office. Undoubtedly some embassies and high commissions recognise that more, and provide a better service for expatriates than do others.
I have corresponded with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary and his colleague, the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind) on this subject, and now wish to mention two cases, in particular, with which I have been concerned. The first case is that of Mr. and Mrs. Strong of Shaftesbury in my constituency. Mr. Strong worked in Nigeria from 1978 until early 1982, and for the last year and a half for a Nigerian company, Lopin Ltd., which withheld his pay for six months without grounds for doing so. Mr. and Mrs. Strong suffered severe harassment, were threatened at gunpoint by the company's security guard, and lost furniture and belongings as well as a good deal of money and their passports in the process. Mr. and Mrs. Strong fully recognise that the British Government cannot be responsible for privately contracted agreements, but the efficacy of the legal processes in countries such as Nigeria 697 is not as great as it is in Britain. It is, therefore, even more necessary for high commissions or embassies in such countries to take an active and vigorous interest in protecting the interests of British people working there.
My hon. Friend the Minister of State is aware of the details of that case, so I shall not go into further detail now. But my constituents felt—and I agree with them—that the high commission seemed to have given some indifferent advice and had certainly failed to pursue matters on their behalf with the sort of zeal and energy that they are entitled to expect. As a result of my investigation of the case of Mr. and Mrs. Strong, it became apparent that there are many other expatriates who have worked in Nigeria and who are having difficulties in securing payment of their salaries and moneys owed from their time working there.
There is now an organisation called Unpaid Personnel Nigeria, which is actively assisting its members to obtain payment of moneys they are owed. I have been in contact with the company Expatriates International Limited, which runs a magazine and provides services to expatriates. About 7,000 members of that organisation are assisted by it in avoiding some of the worst pitfalls that are to be found by those seeking work for foreign employer companies. The organisation has encouraged those owed money to submit claims to a London bank before the IMF was prepared to lend Nigeria further money. That is certainly one way of trying to secure the payment of moneys that are owed.
It has to be recognised that in the context of Nigeria companies employing expatriates can often use the protection of their Government or of those in authority there to avoid the payment of moneys that are due. That is why this is a matter with which the British Government should be concerned. My hon. Friend the Minister of State and his colleague Baroness Young have been helpful in looking into the facts of this, and other such Nigerian cases generally. But in my view there comes a point at which Government-to-Government pressure has to be applied. I should like to see that pressure applied, and I urge my hon. Friend to take up all such matters with the Nigerian Government. I hope that he will put the repayment of moneys to expatriates on the table in any bilateral negotiations, and will also raise this issue at the EEC level.
I also wish to raise the case of my constituent, Malcolm Pike of Blandford, whose experience in Libya is altogether different, but illustrates again the need for vigilance on the part of our Foreign Office in protecting British people working abroad. Mr. Malcolm Pike had worked in Libya for a company called Lomond Engineering between August 1980 and June 1982, but was unable to secure employment thereafter on his return to Britain. He therefore accepted an offer of work from Lomond Engineering again, and went to Libya in June 1983, following that company's nationalisation.
Mr. Pike's task was to assist in finalising the claim for compensation with the National Petroleum Services Company of Libya and to assist in dealing with the tax office in view of his previous experience with the company and knowledge of its affairs. It subsequently appeared that the company had substantial tax liabilities and the only other employees of the company left Libya, leaving Mr. Pike to continue his work. The two executives in the company to whom he was reporting became impossible to 698 contact, and despite various assurances Mr. Pike has been left in Libya without pay and is owed a substantial sum of unpaid salary and expenses. He is not allowed to leave the country as, under Libyan law, he can be held hostage for the unpaid tax of his employer company. Mr. Pike is now subsisting on the generosity of friends, without money or work. Despite the admirable efforts of the British Government's representative in Libya, Mr. George Anderson, he is in effect being detained there.
It must be clear by now to the Libyan authorities that the employer lacks resources, and is abundantly clear that Mr. Pike has no funds himself. My constituent faces a bleak Christmas. His case should be an awful warning to anyone contemplating work for such a company in a country that has such an oppressive law enabling it to hold tax hostages. I know that my constituent's parents will, like me, much appreciate all efforts that my hon. Friend can exert to secure the release of that young man in Libyan limbo.
I have drawn these two cases to my hon. Friend's attention because of the important work available for British expatriates to carry out in developing countries and because of the need to ensure that they are encouraged to do so rather than deterred by the unfortunate circumstances of my constituents, Mr. and Mrs. Strong and Mr. Malcolm Pike.
My hon. Friend will have my full support in strong measures to convince the Governments of the foreign countries concerned, however delicate relations may be, that the duty and determination of the British Government are to ensure that British citizens are protected and their rights safeguarded.
My message is that British expatriates working abroad do an invaluable job, but are entitled to expect the support and positive assistance of the Government. I look forward to hearing what my hon. Friend has to say.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Tim Renton)I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, North (Mr. Baker) for raising this important subject on an Adjournment debate. He recalled that many years ago, he and I were together on a selection interview committee. I think the seat involved was Sheffield, Park division—which, despite its salubrious name, was described in the local paper as being a roll-call for all the council houses and tower blocks in Sheffield. It was an extremely safe seat for Labour, which was duly won, again in the forthcoming general election, by the present Lord Mulley. Since then, my hon. Friend has gone on to what might be described as the greener pastures of Dorset, and I to the greener pastures of Sussex. Perhaps we have both benefited from the experience of appearing before the selection interview committee.
My hon. Friend quoted from his classical knowledge to remind us of the days when some of the countries of northern Africa which are now threatened by drought and famine were the corn belt of the then civilised world. As he said, while it may be hard for deserts to bloom again, there is no doubt that one of the great challenges to trade and aid working together in the years ahead will be that of tackling the increasing problem of drought, overpopulation and too many animals, that lead to the severe famine that we are now seeing in Ethiopia and Sudan.
699 As my hon. Friend rightly said, there is a role for expatriates from western countries to help in that process. He referred to the number of expatriates and the important task that they carry out. I wholeheartedly endorse his words. Many expatriates work for British companies. They assist not only the countries where they are based but help Britain to regain trade that we may have lost and to bid for important new contracts that would be of great benefit to our manufacturers.
The size of the problem is mirrored in the number of expatriates. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office believe that there are between 5 million and 6 million. While for many of them the work that they do is very important to this country, they must accept that they must abide by the laws and regulations of their host countries. At times, they must adapt their own living styles to comply with local customs.
My hon. Friend called for vigilance from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, but I am sure that he will endorse my belief that those going to work abroad must themselves be vigilant in considering the living conditions and the laws of the countries where they want to work, and accepting that they will not be the same as those in the United Kingdom
It is worth repeating that living in other countries is not the same as living in Britain. Expatriate workers must make judgments based on many factors. They will no doubt receive high and, in many cases, tax-free salaries as an inducement. They often have good living conditions. But they must remember other factors such as local customs, security conditions and the fact that the drinking of alcohol may be banned, all of which will make their lives different. It is not possible for Britain to tell other countries what their laws should be, any more than we expect other countries to tell us what our laws should be.
Britain has had exchange control regulations in the past. We might — God forbid — under a Labour Government have such regulations again. Britain has managed to get rid of them but other countries have not. That has a bearing on the flow of salaries and pensions from other countries to workers who have returned to the United Kingdom, and I shall mention more about that in relation to Nigeria. We cannot automatically expect other countries to follow suit when we make a change for the better. It is worth remembering that the laws of countries change because of a change of Government, and they sometimes deprive expatriates of rights that they expected when they went to work in those countries.
Our consulates department is open every day of the year, other than Christmas day, to advise people who are intending to travel. It is important that would-be expatriate workers find out as much as possible about the country that they intend to visit. We shall do all that we properly can to protect them. To assist with advice before expatriates travel, my Department, in conjunction with the Central Office of Information, has produced a leaflet entitled
Get it right before you gowith the subtitleWhat the British consulate can do for you, what the British consulate cannot do for you and what you should do for yourself".I am pleased to say that last week, on behalf of my Department, I accepted a plain English award for the leaflet—
§ Mr. Nicholas BakerHear, hear.
§ Mr. RentonI am glad to have the approbation of my hon. Friend.
The first print of the leaflet—700,000—has already been used and we intend to have an even larger reprint next year. This graphic leaflet spells out the role of the consul. It makes it clear that consuls abroad are not lawyers, doctors or nannies. They are there to advise and help those who are in difficulties. Their role especially is to advise those who are in difficulties on how to get good local professional help. Their job is to offer helpful and realistic advice, which may at times be unpalatable. I strongly suggest to hon. Members that they suggest to their constituents who are considering working abroad that they read the leaflet or get in touch with the consular department before they go.
We are conscious that more Britons are working abroad as well as travelling abroad for their holidays. This means that the volume of work for our consular staff is increasing. We are confident that the staff is working well. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office keeps staffing levels under constant review so that, in spite of cuts in a few places, temporary or permanent staff reinforcements are sent out as necessary. I have already referred to the 5 million expatriates who are working abroad. In addition, 25 million Britons go abroad on holiday. My hon. Friend will realise the burden of the workload that falls on the 292 diplomatic service officers abroad who are involved in full-time consular work along with another 170 locally engaged staff. Thus, a total of 462 are involved solely in consular work. That has to be measured against the 5 million expatriates and the 25 million who go abroad on holiday. It is correct that all our ambassadors and high commissioners are actively interested in consular work. It is against that background that we give strong advice to those going to live or work abroad to find out about local conditions in advance. That must be said in the light of the volume of work that comes over the desks of our consular officials.
I recognise the strong merit of my hon. Friend's remarks and I turn to the two places that he has mentioned. First, I direct myself to the difficult case of Mr. and Mrs. Strong and the sad experience that they had with Mr. Strong's employer in Nigeria. As my hon. Friend probably knows, there are 11,000 British citizens who remain in Nigeria; many more have returned to the United Kingdom. I fully understand from the details that my hon. Friend has given why he felt that he should become involved in the case.
Mr. and Mrs. Strong's difficulties in Nigeria were first brought to our attention in London in April 1983, more than a year after they had left Nigeria. My hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Pentland (Mr. Rifkind), Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, has had lengthy correspondence with my hon. Friend. I refer especially to his letters of 29 December 1983 and 9 February 1984. By and large, the high commissioner could not intervene in what was a private contractoral dispute for settlement through legal channels. It would be useful if my hon. Friend were to remind Mr. and Mrs. Strong that when it comes to fair treatment for Britons employed by Nigerian companies, contracts of employment between British citizens and Nigerian companies are essentially private matters between employee and employer. Her Majesty's Government have no standing to intervene when things go wrong.
701 Our high commissioner in Nigeria, as elsewhere, is willing to give advice and formulae should a dispute arise but if, as in Mr. and Mrs. Strong's case, an amicable settlement cannot be reached, the employee has to seek legal advice and pursue his complaint through his own legal channels. Mr. and Mrs. Strong's case is a private matter and we have no standing to negotiate a code of practice with the Nigerian Government for employment in the private sector. Equally, we would not expect the Nigerian Government to try to negotiate a similar code of employment for Nigerians working in Britain.
I turn from the particular to the general and to my hon. Friend's point about the problem and delay in obtaining remittances of salaries, pensions or other payments that are due from Nigeria. He will realise that the difficulties are caused by the shortage of foreign exchange in Nigeria and the prolonged recession combined with Nigerian bureaucratic confusion and delay. Her Majesty's Government have no legal standing in individual cases but my hon. Friend has asked for Government-to-Government pressure to be brought. I can assure him that that is the sort of pressure that we have been trying to bring to bear. We have tackled the problem on several occasions, including approaches at ministerial level, and we have received assurances that financial commitments will be met and that remittances will eventually come through, although the delays may be lengthy.
One member of the high commission in Lagos is employed virtually full time in taking action with the central bank to expedite remittance applications when progress in individual cases appears to have stopped. This has helped to achieve a successful outcome in many cases, including some where delay in receiving payment is causing especial hardship. However, the only long-term solution to the problem is an improvement in Nigeria's economy. We shall continue to work with the Nigerian Government and in consultation with the International Monetary Fund towards this end.
I am glad that, earlier in the year, Mr. and Mrs. Strong finally received their passports from Nigeria. I know that the return of their passports was due in no small measure to the hard work of my hon. Friend in pressing for that to happen.
I turn from the problems of Mr. and Mrs. Strong in Nigeria to those of Mr. Malcolm Pike, who is in Libya. This is a very difficult case. My hon. Friend will know that there are about 5,000 British citizens living and working in Libya. We have had no diplomatic relations with Libya in the past months. Relations were severed after the tragic murder of Policewoman Fletcher in April and the subsequent Libyan embassy seige. The Italian embassy in Tripoli has been our main channel of communication since then with the Libyan authorities. We are generally confident that, thanks to their help and our own British interests section in Tripoli, which is staffed by two diplomatic service officers, we are able to do everything possible to protect the interests of British citizens who remain working in Libya.
We first heard of Mr. Pike's case in June. Mr. Pike is an accountant and he has been held responsible by the Libyan authorities for the debts of the company for which he works, which is Lomond Engineering. He is not in prison but the Libyans have been holding his passport. Mr. Pike's solicitors in London are also pursuing the matter 702 with the London office of Lomond Engineering. My hon. Friend referred to Mr. George Anderson, who was our consul in Tripoli. His place has been taken in recent weeks by Mr. Hugh Dunnachie. Mr. Dunnachie has been in frequent touch with Mr. Pike. I understand that their last meeting was about 10 days ago. I am happy to tell my hon. Friend that our consul believes that Mr. Pike's difficulties are gradually being resolved.
I have just been passed a note saying that Mr. Pike has now been able to leave Libya by arranging to allow a deputy to substitute for a while. Doubtless, that will be of great help to Mr. Pike and it will be specially welcome news with the Christmas holiday just ahead.
Mr. Pike is involved in a commercial dispute in which, for the reasons I have stated, it is not proper for the Government to intervene. Her Majesty's consul on the spot is giving Mr. Pike all the assistance he can properly give.
I have spoken about these two individual cases and the inevitable volume of work that comes to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office generally and to the consular section in particular in dealing with the large number of expatriates working abroad and Britons going on holiday abroad. I remind the House that the consular section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is open every day, save Christmas. Those on the staff do their utmost to give sound advice to the Britons about to leave Britain to work or for a holiday. I believe that it would be in the Christmas spirit if the whole House were to use this opportunity to send its good wishes and thanks to all our diplomatic officers who are serving overseas during this holiday period, whether in embassies, high commissions or consulates, for the difficult task they do and the manner in which they perform that task with limited resources.
§ Mr. Nicholas BakerI certainly join in the Christmas wish my hon. Friend has expressed to all our diplomatic staff. I thank him for his reply about Mr. Malcolm Pike. On other occasions, an arrangement of a substitute to take his place has been in train and has not taken place. My hon. Friend's news is welcome, and I hope that it will result in my constituent being able to join his parents for Christmas. Will my hon. Friend encourage Mr. Hugh Dunnachie to continue the kind assistance he is obviously giving? I shall be completely happy with the conclusion only when my constituent is able to leave Libya and return home.
§ Mr. RentonI thank my hon. Friend for those remarks. Mr. Dunnachie is the consul who recently took Mr. Anderson's place in Tripoli. I fully understand my hon. Friend's comments, and I have no doubt that Mr. Dunnachie will pursue the course my hon. Friend has requested.
I shall end in the spirit of Christmas and goodwill—I hope the House will not mind this — and quote a message sent on 12 October 1984 to the high commission in Lagos. In part, it reads:
I am writing to thank you and your consular staff for all support, help and advice that was so freely given over the past two weeks. That they were able to complete so much in settling affairs was due in no small part to the active and willing involvement of your consular staff.It is always nice to end a debate with a bouquet, and I am sure that the whole House will be pleased to know that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office regularly receives such bouquets.