Foreign Affairs Council

HC Deb 14 March 1984 vol 56 cc393-400 3.31 pm

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Sir Geoffrey Howe)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the Foreign Affairs Council which took place in Brussels on 12.13 March. There was also an informal meeting of Foreign Ministers to discuss preparations an next week's European Council. There was, in addition, a ministerial conference with the Portuguese.

The two main points for us were 1983 refunds and preparations for the European Council.

On the first point, 1983 refunds, the positions of the Council and the Parliament have now been reconciled. There is, therefore, no technical obstacle to the Community meeting its commitment on time. Two member states were unwilling to approve the adoption of the regulations at yesterday's meeting. The decision has therefore been deferred until next week.

I made it clear that this delay is unjustified and misconceived. The majority of other member states take the same view. It will in any case be difficult to reach agreement at next week's European Council on the main subjects on the agenda. It is clearly not in the interests of the Community for any fresh obstacle to be placed in the way.

The Foreign Affairs Council will meet again on 20 March to consider the regulations. Adoption at that stage would enable the Parliament to take the further step necessary to release the refunds by the end of March.

On the second point, preparations for the summit itself, the principal issues on the agenda are: control of Community expenditure; budget imbalances; reform of agricultural policy; and, if our conditions are met, the question of an increase in own resources. On the budgetary points, some further progress was made, but there is still a long way to go. On agriculture, Ministers were able to make rather more progress, and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be making a statement to the House this afternoon.

The next step is for the Presidency to circulate texts for consideration at the European Council. We shall judge these texts by the extent to which they meet our essential conditions, which remain unchanged.

On the other issues, Ministers agreed in principle to the extension of the Community's coking coal scheme to promote intra-Community trade; to a further programme of demonstration projects to stimulate the development of alternative sources of energy; and to the provision, subject to further discussion by Energy Ministers, of funds for social measures in the coal industry, which will be of benefit to this country. They also agreed that the next Energy Council would consider Community action to promote investment in solid fuels.

The council again considered the Commission's proposal to stabilise imports of certain cereal substitutes. It was agreed that any decisions on this proposal would have to be linked with reform of the common agricultural policy.

Ministers agreed on a Commission mandate for the forthcoming re-negotiations of the international cocoa agreement.

The Council agreed on a proposal for aid for the development of Portuguese agricultural structures. This agreement, and a declaration on agricultural issues in the enlargement negotiations, were presented to the Portuguese at the ministerial conference.

Ministers signed the treaty amendment needed to provide for Greenland's withdrawal from the Community.

Finally, the Council also made progress in discussion of the new common commercial policy regulation, to strengthen the Community's ability to respond to illegitimate actions by third countries in international trade.

Mr. Robin Cook (Livingston)

I am sure that the whole House will join in felicitating the people of Greenland on escaping from the consequences of the common agricultural policy and expenditure such as that imposed upon the British people. The right hon. and learned Gentleman, when he addressed the House last month, stated, as he will recall, that the Council of Ministers was unanimous in making representations to the Parliament about the British budget rebate. Are we to understand from his statement today that now that the Council of Ministers has heard from the Parliament it is no longer unanimous about accepting those terms and paying the budget rebate? If that is the case, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman not agree that three weeks later we are further from achieving a solution to the problem? Is it not now becoming increasingly clear, as the Opposition have warned him, that there is no realistic possibility of the British budget rebate's being repaid by 31 March and that in those circumstances the time has come for Britain to safeguard its own position by withholding an equivalent sum from our contribution to the 1984 budget?

The Foreign Secretary advised the House that a greater progress had been made on the agricultural fund. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the settlement made by the Agriculture Council earlier this week provides for expenditure greater than budgeted for by the Commission? Is the Foreign Secretary aware of the statement by Gaston Thorn this morning in Strasbourg that, as a result, the Community will be £1,000 million overspent in the current year? The Foreign Secretary will surely not expect the House to accept that settlement as reform of the CAP, or even as effective control of the expenditure of the CAP.

Finally, has the Foreign Secretary noted the statement by his right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that we must continue to live within our means, but, if the summit were to tell us that more money was available, that would be different?

Would the Foreign Secretary not agree that his right hon. Friend has made an excellent, succinct case against any increase in own resources, which, on the testimony of his right hon. Friend, would merely be squandered by the EEC on even higher food prices?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity later this afternoon of taking up with my right hon. Friend the observations in which he is interested, but I will deal with the main substance of his point on that. There is of course no doubt that one of the hazards to the common agricultural policy and the Community is the extent to which the agricultural budget has been overspent. It is to secure more effective control of that that Agriculture Ministers, and indeed the agricultural community, are having to face very tough and difficult decisions. That is inescapable if we are to curb the growth of surpluses that are unsaleable on any reasonable terms. So steps are being taken, as they have to be taken, in the direction of that reform. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will support those steps when they come to be decided.

The hon. Gentleman is entirely right that, on the steps that were being considered at the last meeting of the Council of Ministers, the Council was unanimous in sending forward the proposals that were necessary at that stage to the Parliament.

As far as that stage is concerned, the Parliament has given its opinion and there is no need for any conciliation. But unanimity did not prevail last night, as I pointed out, when two member states declined to adopt the regulations. I described that as an unconstructive act, to say the least, and it certainly has not been helpful. However, it is not right to conclude, as the hon. Gentleman does, that there is no realistic possibility of the Community's fulfilling its commitments. Provided the necessary decisions are taken at the Council of Ministers arranged for next Tuesday, it should be possible for those commitments to be fulfilled. Nevertheless, it is a matter for great regret that that additional delay should have been introduced.

Sir Anthony Meyer (Clwyd, North-West)

Will my right hon. and learned Friend continue imperturbably along his path in negotiating the best possible settlement of these outstanding problems, while making it plain, as he did in his broadcast, that these problems are common to the Community and are not a matter of the United Kingdom versus its nine partners?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

My hon. Friend is entirely right to point out that the solution of the problems that are on the agenda for the European Council on Monday and Tuesday of next week requires a common and resolute approach by all the members of the Community. They are indeed problems for every one of the member states and for the Community as a whole. We shall certainly continue to do our best to ensure a conclusion that is acceptable to this country.

Mr. J. Enoch Powell (Down, South)

In approaching a European Council at which, on the showing of the Foreign Secretary, it will be difficult to reach agreement on the items that we have insisted shall be on the agenda, will the Government bear in mind that it would be no disaster if this country decided to recover its rights to manage its own finances and to make its own laws and policies?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The right hon. Gentleman has long maintained that view. It is not a view which was endorsed by the electorate at the last election.

Mr. Powell

That will change.

Sir John Osborn (Sheffield, Hallam)

I welcome the references to alternative energy, solid fuels and the social fund, in relation to pit closures, but did my right hon. and learned Friend take the opportunity to suggest that we should sell more British coal and possibly protect it?

Was the question of acid rain drawn to his attention? That was the subject of questions in the House on Monday, and Germany and other countries are taking seriously the damage to their forests.

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The question of acid rain was not discussed during this meeting of the Council. It is a matter of great importance to Germany and other countries and has been considered at the Environment Council.

There was no discussion at this Council of the case for more sales of British coal. That is primarily a matter for the Energy Council and, as my hon. Friend said, it is an important subject.

Mr. Bowen Wells (Hertford and Stortford)

I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on his dogged approach to extremely difficult negotiations. He mentioned the settlement of the international cocoa agreement. Will that put any extra charge on the Overseas Development Administration budget?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I do not think so, but I will write to my hon. Friend to tell him the exact position.

Mr. Merlyn Rees (Morley and Leeds, South)

Does the Foreign Secretary agree with the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath), that the Government would get better results in Europe if the Prime Minister stopped treating our partners as if they were enemies?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I do not believe that the judgment implied in that question is correct. It is certain that the provision for our accession to the Community, negotiated by the Government led by my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath), foresaw—it was agreed by the Community countries—that, if an unacceptable situation were to arise, steps to correct it would have to be taken. It is now common ground in the House and throughout the Community that just such an unacceptable situation has arisen and it is necessary for those steps to be taken. It is right that our case should be put firmly and resolutely, but in the spirit that is appropriate between partners. That is exactly what we are doing.

Mr. Russell Johnston (Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber)

Does that answer mean that the Foreign Secretary rejects the highly critical and widely publicised remarks of the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath)?

The Foreign Secretary said that the Government would judge European summit texts by the extent to which they met our essential conditions, which remain unchanged. Is it not the case that, if all Governments' essential conditions remain unchanged, the summit will fail?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

It is right that we should judge the outcome of those negotiations against the conditions that we have always made clear. They should make effective provisions for the control of Community expenditure, including, particularly, agricultural expenditure, and should make effective provisions for the changing of the budgetary pattern to secure a fair outcome for this country. Of course, the judgment that has to be made on those matters at the end of the day is a matter of judgment. It is a matter which will have to commend itself to this House. However, the fact that those two conditions have to be fulfilled is inescapable and is well recognised by our partners.

Mr. Ron Leighton (Newham, North-East)

Is not this whole grisly business getting worse and worse and increasingly farcical? Has not every summit since Dublin been a predictable flop, and will not the next summit assuredly be a dismal flop? In those circumstances, would not it be more prudent to explore the suggestion of Mr. Chirac, the mayor of Paris, who suggested that it would be better for the United Kingdom to leave the CAP?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

Mr. Chirac is entitled to his opinion, just as the hon. Gentleman is entitled to his, but I do not share the hon. Gentleman's view. If the issues that are before the Community are not resolved as they have to be, that will be a major setback for the prospects of economic and political co-operation of a sensible sort between Britain and the rest of our partners, but it will not be a dismal flop. I am sure that that view will be projected by the whole House.

Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)

If my right hon. and learned Friend is party to an agreement with our Community partners that involves an increase in own resources, will he kindly undertake not to justify it on the basis of the entry of Spain and Portugal to the Community, particularly so as that is not likely to happen until 1 January 1986 at the earliest, when there will be a long transitional period? Therefore, there will not be a significant call on Community funds for at least four years. Will my right hon. and learned Friend give us at least that reassurance?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I have told my hon. Friend more than once that one of the factors to be taken into account by those who argue the case for an increase in own resources is the accession of Spain and Portugal. He is right in saying that the transition will not take place until 1986, but it is probable that the own resources decision, if one is to be taken, will not be operating until that year. The way in which that operates is another factor, because it will not be automatic. I cannot give the assurance for which my hon. Friend asks. However, the accession of Spain and Portugal is bound to be a factor in considering whether an increase in own resources is justified.

Mr. Eric Deakins (Walthamstow)

Did the Foreign Secretary make it clear to his colleagues in the Common Market at the Council meeting that the United Kingdom, at the Heads of Government meeting which will take place shortly, will refuse to consider an increase in own resources until the two preconditions that have been laid down have been met, or is there a possibility that the two preconditions will be traded off against each other at the same time at the Heads of Government meeting?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

It has always been part of the agenda set by the Stuttgart summit that all those issues should be considered and answered together. We have always made it clear that the question whether there should be an increase in own resources arises only if the other two conditions are fulfilled. It is plain that at that stage they will have to be considered together.

Mr. Nicholas Budgen (Wolverhampton, South-West)

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that if, at some late stage, she comes to the House and asks for an increase in own resources, the request should be accompanied by provision for primary legislation? There are so many different factors to be considered. Would not it be right to allow a detailed discussion so that if he makes that request the country has a chance genuinely to express its view upon a multiplicity of factors?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

There will no doubt be a number of opportunities in a number of different ways for the House to consider the conclusions of the summit meeting next week, depending on the nature and extent of the conclusions. As the House has been told on a number of occasions, the procedure for any possible increase in own resources would be the laying of a draft Order in Council under section 1(3) of the European Communities Act 1972. that would need to be approved by each House of Parliament.

Mr. Budgen

After one debate.

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The way in which that would be debated would be a matter for the usual channels.

Mr. Roland Boyes (Houghton and Washington)

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that, when describing the major items for the agenda of the next Council, he did not mention unemployment, industrial democracy or economic crisis? Is this a reflection of the contempt which he and his Conservative colleagues have for these subjects, or does he agree that it is irresponsible that these items are not to be at the head of the agenda?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The hon. Gentleman does not have a very accurate insight. The items to which he has referred are of concern to the whole House, and almost all the decisions that we take on almost every economic issue are based upon a consideration of them, but they are not on the agenda for the Council next week. The matters that will appear on that agenda are those that are directly relevant and important to the solution of the problems that he has mentioned.

Mr. Bryan Gould (Dagenham)

Will the Foreign Secretary make it clear to his Common Market colleagues that the wider issue of any increase in own resources depends on a fundamental reform of the common agricultural policy and is not linked to the specific and separate question of the rebate which is due to us?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

Here I come back to the same point. All the matters set by the Stuttgart summit for the agenda, which is now under discussion, have to be considered and answered at the same time. Alongside the question whether there is to be an increase in own resources is the question of correcting the budgetary imbalances, and the question of securing effective control of Community expenditure, including specifically agricultural expenditure, and, of course, alongside that are all the items on the Agriculture Council agenda—all those matters that are related to the reform of the common agricultural policy. It is only if the Council is satisfied that those questions have been dealt with, alongside each other, in the right way, that the conclusions can be reached.

Mr. Nigel Spearing (Newham, South)

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the meeting of Foreign Ministers which will take place after the Heads of Government meeting on 20 March may be asked to take executive action on agreements which have been reached? In that case will he assure the House that no proposal will be approved by the Council which has not been debated in the House?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I understand the importance of the point raised by the hon. Gentleman. I should judge that the only decision likely to be taken by the Council is one in relation to the adoption of the regulations that I have already mentioned, which would be acceptable to the House.

Several Hon. Members

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. There is another statement to follow, but I shall call those hon. Members who have been rising to ask questions.

Mr. Michael Shersby (Uxbridge)

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the agreement that has been reached on a mandate for the forthcoming re-negotiation of the international cocoa agreement will be widely welcomed in the Third world, and that one would hope that it will be widely welcomed by Opposition Members?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has said.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

Bearing in mind the resolution recently passed by the European Assembly, could the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell us whether the Foreign Ministers discussed the case of the notorious Nazi war criminal, Rauff, who lives quite freely, and under his own name, in Chile, and who is held responsible for the murder of some 250,000 men, women and children during the war years? What action will be taken by the Council of Foreign Ministers, and other bodies of the European Community, to ensure that Rauff is expelled from Chile to face proceedings in Germany?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The question of Rauff was not discussed in the Council of Ministers. I shall consider the point raised by the hon. Gentleman to see whether it would be appropriate for that to happen.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)

Does the Foreign Secretary dissent from the view that each Greenlander, each year for the next 10 years, will get from the EEC upwards of £200? Is this wholly satisfactory in the circumstances?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The amount payable to Greenlanders, as a result of the fisheries protocol, which is part of the matters now subject to agreement, and which I think lasts for five years, is significantly less than that which was payable under their former arrangement, and there is no provision for continuation of any payments to Greenland thereafter, in the absence of agreement on the new arrangements.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Does the Foreign Secretary recall that, when the Prime Minister came back from the Venice summit, after she had been floating down the river in a gondola, looking like someone selling Walls Cornettos, she came to the House, and said at the Dispatch Box that the summit had agreed that there would be a doubling of coal production? Within a couple of years, the same Prime Minister had appointed MacGregor to run the coal industry, and not to double——

Mr. Speaker

Order. Here we go again. The hon. Gentleman must put a question to the Foreign Secretary, not to the Prime Minister.

Mr. Skinner

I asked him whether he confirms, or recalls—perhaps he cannot——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman knows the rules. Will he please put a question to the Foreign Secretary?

Mr. Skinner

What many people outside would want to ask the Foreign Secretary is how much longer we are going to have Ministers coming to the Dispatch Box—we have had them for 11 years—talking about summits, talking about getting together, talking about solving this, that and the other, and the most symbolic thing about the Common Market happened a few weeks ago. It happened in that big traffic jam, that big road block, where it proved once and for all——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is abusing my calling him to ask a question.

Mr. Cook

May I tempt the Foreign Secretary to give his view of the agriculture package? Does that package, which will result in increased agriculture expenditure, amount to reform or even to effective control of spending? He is surely not going to try to pass it off on the House as meeting the agriculture requirement of his two conditions for an increase in own resources. Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman recall that after the last Council meeting he told the House that there had been no proposal for an increase in the VAT element to 2 per cent.? Is he aware that on 5 March such a proposal was tabled by the Commission? Surely he will not agree to doubling Britain's VAT payments to the EEC, even after yesterday's raid on the chip shops of the nation. He will surely assure the House that he will not accept such an increase, whatever conditions he succeeds in obtaining next week.

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I have made it plain in answer after answer that the question whether there should be any increase in own resources must be considered before one considers how large any such increase should be Thus, there can be no question of accepting a figure as large as the hon. Gentleman suggests.

The hon. Gentleman must understand that the task of securing effective control and reform not just of the CAP but of almost every agricultural policy in the world, in order to secure effective control of expenditure in a fashion that is compatible with sensible arrangements for agriculture, is enormously difficult. The Agriculture Council, together with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, have made substantial advances towards securing reform and more effective control. Their agenda has not yet been completed and the conclusion of their deliberations will have to be awaited.