HC Deb 02 February 1988 vol 126 cc853-5 3.32 pm
Mr. Bryan Gould (Dagenham)

(by private notice): To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the granting of an export licence for Racal-Tacticom for the sale of military radio equipment to the PLO.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate and Consumer Affairs (Mr. Francis Maude)

It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual cases, but I have no evidence from the Department's records to suggest that such equipment was licensed for export to the PLO. In view of the allegiations, however, the matter is under investigation by the various Departments concerned.

Mr. Gould

Will the Under-Secretary assure the House that he will return to the House to give an account of the outcome of those investigations? Will he further assure the House that there have been no similar instances in other cases, and that they will not occur again? The Minister must be aware of the great concern that equipment of this sort might reach armed forces in South Africa, Argentina, parties to the Gulf war, and especially the Contras in Nicaragua. Will he guarantee that none of those has benefited in the past, or will benefit from similar mistakes by his Department?

Mr. Maude

I do not accept for a moment that a mistake has been made by the DTI, but investigations are being carried out to find out exactly what, if anything, untoward has happened. It is not clear by any means that something untoward has occurred.

We have a very good system in this country for ensuring that any exports of sensitive material are cleared in relation to their ultimate destination. Great care is taken by all Departments concerned before granting export licences for sensitive equipment. I believe that our system is as good as any.

More than 100,000 applications for export licences are made every year. Clearly it has not been possible to check through every one of those to see what has been going on.

Mr. Dennis Walters (Westbury)

Is not the position with regard to the PLO as stated by my noble Friend Lord Carrington when he was Foreign Secretary when he said that Her Majesty's Government did not regard the PLO as a terrorist organisation? In the circumstances, what is all the fuss about? It is not as if we were supplying truncheons to Mr. Rabin to break the bones of Palestinian civilians.

Mr. Maude

I hear what my hon. Friend says, but clearly we would not do anything to enhance the capability of any element within the PLO to carry out acts of violence. I stress again that any application to export sensitive military equipment is cleared by all of the relevant Departments of Government, including the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence.

Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West)

Does the Minister accept the accuracy of the statement that was put out by 10 Downing street on Sunday, that certain elements in the PLO have an appalling terrorist record? Bearing that in mind, and that there is an embargo on the sale of military equipment to Israel, which some of us deplore, can he give an assurance that no arms or other military or sensitive equipment will go to the PLO with the knowledge and consent of Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Maude

I can certainly give the hon. and learned Gentleman the assurance that we have no evidence from our records to suggest that any items of that sort have gone to the PLO. However, we need to continue our investigations because allegations have been made in pubic newspapers and we want to know exactly what lies behind them. If anyone has any papers which controvert what I have said to the House, I should be grateful if he would produce them.

Mr. Andrew MacKay (Berkshire, East)

Is my hon. Friend aware that Racal, which has its headquarters in my constituency and has a distinguished record of exporting all over the world, has a clear policy of not selling to any overseas country or overseas political organisation without the full consent of Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Maude

I hear what my hon. Friend says, and I am sure that that is right.

Mr. James Wallace (Orkney and Shetland)

Will the Minister state what steps his Department takes to ensure that, as he said, the ultimate destination is properly and accurately recorded on applications and that the items subsequently go to that destination? Will he also state whether the equipment that we are discussing falls into the category of lethal or non-lethal equipment for those purposes?

Mr. Maude

The type of equipment that we are talking about has not been made absolutely clear. The sort of equipment that has been described in some of the newspaper reports is not the same as the broad description in the question put to me at the outset by the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould). For sensitive military equipment, information of various sorts has to be provided about its ultimate destination and proposed use. The handling of export licence applications varies according to the type of goods and their proposed destination. Sensitive items are considered by all the relevant Departments, including the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office. It is not possible to have an absolutely foolproof system which makes it clear beyond the peradventure of a doubt that the items go to their stated destination. However, we do everything humanly possible to ensure that that is the case.

Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)

Given the level of state terrorism being meted out daily by the Israeli authorities on innocent Palestinians, and given the public perception that in current affairs in that part of the world the Israelis are very much cast in the role of the baddies, is there anything wrong in allowing the Palestinians to have equipment which we would allow the Israelis to have?

Mr. Maude

I hear what my hon. Friend says, but I cannot get involved in that. My Department is concerned solely with the granting of export licences and we clear those applications, through the Government, in the usual way in the appropriate Departments.

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)

What is the Government's attitude to Members of Parliament of all political persuasions, including Conservative Members and hon. Members who are now Ministers, who have made visits to the middle east that have been sponsored by the PLO—

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is very wide of this question which I should not have thought had anything to do with it.

Mr. Ivan Lawrence (Burton)

Can my hon. Friend say unequivocally that there is no intention on the part of Her Majesty's Government to allow the sale of arms to the PLO?

Mr. Maude

I say what I said before—that we would do nothing that would enhance the capability of any element within the PLO to carry out acts of violence.

Mr. Andrew Faulds (Warley, East)

If the proscription of such equipment being supplied to liberation movements such as the PLO, the ANC and SWAPO is to be morally valid, why should not the supply of such equipment to countries that practise state terrorism, such as Israel against the Palestinians, South Africa against her own people and the United States against Nicaraguans, be proscribed for those countries? In view of the appalling conduct of the Israeli Army, should not Israel's shameless apologists adopt a somewhat more contrite and lower profile on this issue?

Mr. Maude

The hon. Gentleman has raised a number of wide-ranging issues which are certainly beyond my responsibilities and those of my Department. If he pursues them in the usual way, no doubt he will receive a satisfactory answer.

Mr. Robert Adley (Christchurch)

Can my hon. Friend explain the logic of those who oppose the supply of arms or anything else to the PLO, which is opposing the state terrorism of Israel in the middle east, while at the same time supporting the supply of arms to the Afghan rebels who are opposing the state terrorism of the Soviet Union in their country?

Mr. Maude

My hon. Friend airs his point of view. It is interesting and useful, but I cannot add to what I have said already.

Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)

I oppose the sale of arms by the British Government to any country. Is it not clear that there has been Israeli terrorism against Britain in the past, and that the real issue is whether we are in favour of the Palestinian people having their own homeland and their own state? Should not this Government, and every other progressive Government, be concentrating on that issue?

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is very wide of the question. This is a private notice question and not an extension of Question Time.