§ 1. Mr. Spearingasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response has been made by Her Majesty's Government to the most recent United Nations resolution on the subject of the Falkland Islands.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Tim Renton)We voted against this resolution. It is not mandatory. We are not prepared to enter into negotiations on sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, but we remain ready to re-build confidence with Argentina by means of a dialogue on practical ways of improving bilateral relations.
§ Mr. SpearingDoes the Minister agree that the case of the British Government—and, indeed, of the British people — would be a good deal stronger if social and economic conditions in the islands were nearer the norms of 1984 than those of 1784? Is it not a fact that the principal proprietor and factor in the Falkland Islands is one company, whose profits go to absentee shareholders? Is it not also a fact that Lord Shackleton some years ago reported that the land should be made available to the Falkland Islanders? Why are the Government not pursuing that aim more vigorously?
§ Mr. RentonThe hon. Gentleman's references to the distinctions between 1784 and 1984 are rather obscure. There has been press speculation about the private contracts which the Falkland Islands Company entered into with individuals. Those contracts were all entered into 666 freely, without coercion. There is no evidence that would lead us to suppose—and we have checked with the Civil Commissioner — that any degree of coercion was involved in the agreement of those contracts. We are satisfied that under the auspices of the Falkland Islands Development Corporation there will be a gradual approach—as Lord Shackleton recommended—to the question of land subdivision and redistribution. That will take time, but steps are being taken.
§ Sir Anthony Beaumont-DarkIs my hon. Friend aware that I recently returned from a visit to the Falkland Islands? There is no doubt that the people there are 150 per cent. British and that for us to talk about sovereignty at present could mean only that distance and expense had weakened resolve and honour. Although we can talk to the Argentines about many things, including minerals and oil, does my hon. Friend agree that we cannot now or in years to come sell British people unless they wish to live under a different regime, and there is no doubt that the Falkland Islanders do not wish to do so?
§ Mr. RentonI am aware that my hon. Friend and other hon. Members have recently visited the Falkland Islands, and I hope that they all had a most instructive time there. Much of what my hon. Friend said, I endorse. We believe that the Argentines will realise that sovereignty is not for negotiation and that, putting that aside, they wilt themselves search for means by which we can talk about how to improve relations between our two countries on a bilateral basis.
§ Mr. HefferI shall set aside the question whether it was right or wrong to go to war with Argentina—an action which I personally supported at that time. However, now that — as a result of the war — there is a democratically elected Government in Argentina, should we not seriously discuss the future of the Falkland Islands with that Government? Is the Minister aware that, with our finances, we should not pretend that we can sustain the islands for ever, when they are bound to become a bigger and bigger white elephant and supporting them will not serve any purpose for the future of this country?
§ Mr. RentonLike the hon. Gentleman, we welcomed the restoration of democracy in Argentina. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister welcomed it in a message to President Alfonsin last December, and our ambassador to the United Nations made strong reference to it in his speech in the Falklands debate. Although the hon. Gentleman talks in those terms, has he thought about the rights of the Falkland Islanders to self-determination? In our wish to begin talking to Argentina about progress to more normal bilateral relations, it would be sensible for Argentina to realise that the transfer of sovereignty, which is what Argentina means by talking about sovereignty, is not on.
§ Mr. Cyril D. TownsendDoes my hon. Friend appreciate that President Alfonsin was completely opposed to the invasion of the Falkland Islands and should, therefore, be supported on that account? Was it not wrong for one org of Government—not the Foreign Office—actively to discourage Conservative Members of the European Parliament from meeting President Alfonsin on his recent visit to the European Parliament? Is that not completely contradictory to what the Conservative party stands for, and more like the behaviour of a squalid Socialist Council?
§ Mr. RentonWe believed that the European Parliament's invitation to President Alfonsin was inappropriate — [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] I said "inappropriate", bearing in mind the fact that one member of the European Community—Britain—does not have diplomatic relations with Argentina and that Argentina has not yet agreed to a formal cessation of hostilities with Britain. In those circumstances, my use of the word "inappropriate" is perfectly fair and reasonable.
§ Mr. George RobertsonWhat is inappropriate about the European Parliament inviting the newly elected President of a republic to address it—a President who kicked out the junta who invaded the Falkland Islands—and allowing Conservative Members of the European Parliament, who have also been elected, to listen respectfully to someone who has a mandate? As someone who has just returned from Argentina, I assure the Minister that the newly elected Government have a genuine, deeply felt desire to achieve a settlement that will be in the interests of Britain, Argentina and, crucially, of the Falkland Islanders. Should we not expect from the Government a reasonable response to such a conciliatory feeling before it becomes impossible to sustain such conciliatory feelings in that country?
§ Mr. RentonI welcome the hon. Gentleman back from his trip to Argentina, which I am sure he found useful. I must stress that on many occasions during the past 12 months we have sought opportunities for the sort of talks with Argentina that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. The formula that led to the Berne talks was arrived at after months of negotiations, and following an initial message from Britain. We did not break the formula that had been agreed for Berne; the Argentines broke it by their insistence on talking about sovereignty. We hope that, putting sovereignty on one side, we will be able to talk with the Argentines about a range of options that will lead to normal bilateral relations between our countries.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. In fairness to those hon. Members who have questions later on the Order Paper, I ask for briefer questions.