§ 7. Mr. McKelveyTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the United States authorities concerning broadcasting by American television on a Cuban frequency, in violation of international agreements; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. SainsburyNone.
§ Mr. McKelveyWill the Minister explain why no representations have been made? Is he saying that the Government support such naked aggression by America on a small neighbouring country—[Interruption.] Is not there an agreement, signed by 138 countries, that prohibits that sort of invasion of television and radio air space? As the Prime Minister has a special relationship with America, will he please tell that country to stop those naked aggressive cowboy tactics against a small country and ask it to abide by the agreement that it has signed?
§ Mr. SainsburyI find it astonishing that the hon. Gentleman appears to regard something that might allow the people of Cuba to receive information from a source other than that controlled by their Government as naked aggression. There are two reasons why we have made—
§ Mr. KaufmanThat is inviting lawbreaking.
§ Mr. SainsburyIf the right hon. Gentleman would be quiet for a moment, he might hear my answer.
There are two reasons why we have not made representations. The first is that it is for the International Telecommunications Union and the International Frequency Regulation Board to decide whether the broadcasting of TV Marti complies with international regulations. Secondly, it is a matter for the countries concerned, not for the Government.
§ Mr. HanleyDoes my hon. Friend agree that countries should seek the protection of such international regulations only if they obey them?
§ Mr. SainsburyWe have always taken the view that one cannot be selective about the laws that one obeys.
§ Mr. FoulkesBut the American Government are violating a large number of international agreements to which they and the British Government are signatories, in what is now being described as tele-aggression on Cuba —[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
§ Mr. FoulkesAs you know, Mr. Speaker, Conservative Members often ask Opposition Members to condemn lawbreaking, so why do not the British Government condemn this lawbreaking by the Americans?
§ Mr. SainsburyI had hoped that Opposition Members would support the efforts of the BBC World Service, for example, to ensure that accurate information about world affairs is available in as many countries as possible. I suppose, from what the hon. Gentleman has just said, that he would regard that as radio aggression. As I said earlier, it is for internationally established organisations and the two countries concerned to make a judgment.
§ Mr. BurtWhen my hon. Friend next discusses television transmissions to Cuba with the United States, will he encourage it to beam as many programmes as possible about the collapse of communism in eastern Europe, so that the Cuban population can see what will surely come to them within the next couple of years?
§ Mr. SainsburyI fear that my hon. Friend is on to an important point. The Cuban authorities, and the President in particular, may be most alarmed at the idea of the people of Cuba being allowed to know what has happened elsewhere and fear that yet another Marxist-socialist regime would be overthrown if they did.