HC Deb 28 June 1991 vol 193 cc1305-12

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Nicholas Baker.]

2.34 pm
Mr. Neil Thorne (Ilford, South)

In 1816 the pact of Segavli was signed because the British East India Company had been trying to push the boundaries north of India. It met some fierce resistance from Nepal. As a consequence, it was found impossible to proceed any further. Therefore, the pact was signed, which defined the boundaries between India and Nepal. It provided also for the recruitment of soldiers into the British Army. That was 175 years ago. Since then, many Nepalese have served in various Gurkha regiments. About 500,000 men served between 1939 and 1945, and of those 52,000 were either killed or wounded. Thirteen Gurkhas won the Victoria Cross for valour and 13 officers attached to Gurkha regiments were also awarded that supreme honour. No more than 8,000 Nepalese soldiers are now serving in the Gurkhas in the British Army. There are more serving in the Indian Gurkha army, which was created on independence in 1947.

The Select Committee on Defence decided that after Hong Kong was handed over in 1997 it would be important to establish exactly what the future of the Gurkhas would be. The Committee carried out an inquiry and issued a report. The report was responded to in May 1989 by the then Secretary of State for Defence, who gave an undertaking that no fewer than 4,000 Gurkhas would remain within the British Army.

It is important that the relationship should continue and I am sure that the then Secretary of State's promise will be maintained and upheld despite any proposals that are contained in "Options for Change". The salaries and pensions of Gurkha soldiers make a considerable contribution towards the income of the Nepalese people and after such distinguished service by Gurkha soldiers I am sure that the aid will be allowed to continue in that way.

In Nepal there was an hereditary prime ministership that continued for over 100 years. That came to an end with a revolution in 1953 which was led by King Tribhuvan. He then became King in his own right and the monarchy assumed control. Prime Ministers were then appointed from the membership of the Panchayat. That continued under King Mahendra until he was succeeded by the present King Birendra. In 1980 there was some debate about whether a different form of democratic control should ensue. It was decided, however, as a result of a referendum in 1980, that the Panchayat system was the system that the majority of the population wished to remain. That continued for 10 years until the beginning of last year, when there was a certain amount of dissatisfaction with the then system and various people and factions wanted the introduction of a multi-party system.

The King decided, on his own initiative, to overcome the objections and he introduced a multi-party democratic system and gave 14 months to allow it to be developed before general elections were to be held. That decision was entirely of his own making. It was a courageous decision because only 10 years previously a referendum had decided on a different system. The King felt that the majority of his people wanted to move to a multi-party system and, contrary to what many members of the international press corps would have us believe, he instituted it himself.

The elections were held on 12 May. At the invitation of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, I was one of three observers that it had been invited to appoint. The hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) and my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Mr. Bruce) were also invited to attend so that we could see for ourselves whether those elections—the first to be held on a multi-party basis for a long time—were free and fair.

There were 64 international observers, divided into 21 teams. We were distributed throughout the country and the different teams—comprising groups of three or four —had different experiences. However, when we all came together again in Kathmandu after polling had been completed, we discovered that there had been only 57 irregularities in the 1,200 polling districts—a commendable figure. Those 57 districts were repolled the following day. When irregularities were found they were corrected the following day, so it was decided that the elections had been free and fair. We all felt that a good exercise had been conducted.

The elections resulted in an overall majority being obtained by the Nepal Congress party. Indeed, Prime Minister Girija Prashad Koirala has now taken up his post and is running the democratic Government that has been created. The Prime Minister has thanked the King for his action in instituting the election and for ensuring that it was carried out, to the best of his ability, in a free and fair way.

We obviously required considerable support during the campaign and I am glad to say that the British contingent provided a large number of Land-Rovers to facilitate the easy movement throughout the country of many of the teams. In fact, his excellency Timothy George—the British ambassador in Kathmandu—is getting on extremely well with all sections of the community from the King down, and as far as we can ascertain from our observations he is doing an extremely good job and is spoken of extremely well. He and the present Nepalese ambassador, Major General Bharat Kesher Simha, have a large role in maintaining and ensuring that the friendship that has developed over the past 175 years continues.

The country is not very well endowed with many of the mineral resources that so many other regions of the world enjoy, especially the middle east and Africa. It has an extremely large quantity of water, which is especially suitable for the generation of hydro-electric power. It also has the most charming population imaginable, so it is a good part of the world to visit, both to see the magnificent scenery and to be among its charming people. Tourism is expensive in that it needs a lot of infrastructure. To make it popular, it requires the many facilities to which westernised tourists are accustomed, the lack of which means that they will go to other parts of the world.

There are many things that we can and should be doing to ensure that this new democracy is given every possible opportunity. We can assist, for example with roads and other communications. The terrain is rugged, and heavy rains and monsoons have a devastating effect on roads, and are liable to wash them away quickly down the steep terrain. Therefore, roads require a lot of maintenance. We are particularly well placed to give advice and assistance on road building.

We can be of great assistance in the building of hydroelectric systems and of ways to distribute the power to encourage its use both in Nepal and elsewhere in Asia. We could be doing an awful lot in reafforestation. Sadly, during the trade and transit dispute between India and Nepal two or three years ago, the supply of kerosene, for heating and use in cooking, to the peasants in the villages dried up. As a result, they had to cut down vast areas of woodlands so that they had wood for cooking fuel. This has had not only a serious effect on the Nepalese economy and on soil erosion, but a knock-on effect in that, if the waters are not held back by forests and allowed to proceed in an orderly fashion on to the plains of Bangladesh, flooding occurs. Reafforestation is high on the agenda, as we can do much to assist both Nepal and Bangladesh.

In the negotiations between India and Nepal to bring about an amicable trade and transit agreement, I have to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler), who is present today, and who helped me in getting through to the Indian authorities the message that this delay was causing damage. I am delighted that trade is now easier, but that damage must be made good. We should use every possible opportunity to put right the matter as quickly as possible.

We can help in many little ways. I noticed that the Nepalese have closely followed our parliamentary system. While we were there, we went to visit the facilities that are being constructed. They are busy building their second chamber. I hope that we can give the Nepalese Parliament a gift, such as a Speaker's chair, permanently to remind both the British and the Nepalese of our long-lasting friendship. There are so many ways in which we could help. We have an obligation because we have a long friendship with Nepal. We have been asked for very little in the past in return for the vast amount of blood that has been spilt on our behalf among Nepalese. It is up to us to go out to them rather than to wait for them to come to us for assistance.

Britain was the first to have a diplomatic mission in Kathmandu and it was to London that Nepal's first mission came when it started to become interested in international affairs. In view of our special position, we should do as much as we can to ensure that our thanks are properly and adequately expressed.

2.50 pm
Mr. Tom Cox (Tooting)

It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Ilford, South (Mr. Thorne). I was one of the observers who were privileged to go to Nepal and witness the elections. It gave one the opportunity not only to have an insight into a beautiful country but to get to know some charming, hard-working and talented people. The area of Nepal that I visited was Pokhoral, which is famous for its mountains and trekking. I found that the election was undoubtedly freely contested, with a few very small infringements. There is no doubt that the election in Nepal can take its place with genuine elections anywhere in the world.

In the area that I visited, I saw men and women standing for hours in line waiting for their turn to vote. I saw elderly and disabled people carried on the backs of men along mountain tracks often for several miles so that they could have the opportunity to vote. That showed clearly how much the people of Nepal welcomed the opportunity to take part in the election and how much they support democracy.

As the hon. Member for Ilford, South said, the result of the election has done two things which we can only welcome. First, it has produced a Government who have a strong enough majority to provide decisive government. Secondly, it has produced a strong enough Opposition to ensure that the voice of those who do not always agree with the Government can be heard. I am sure that we all agree that that is good for democracy.

As the hon. Member for Ilford, South said, it is now the time for us to consider what help we can give. There is great respect in Britain for Nepal. Again, the hon. Gentleman touched on that. Sadly, many people here will never have the opportunity to go to Nepal but they most certainly look with pride to the role that the Gurkha troops have played for many years in the British Army.

It is against that background that any policy of help and involvement that the Minister may be able to tell us about today will receive great support. Of course, the nature of that help is a matter for discussions between the Nepalese and British Governments. In view of what I saw in the area of Nepal that I visited, I hope that two issues will be considered. The hon. Member for Ilford, South mentioned the development of a road and transport infrastructure in Nepal. The other equally important issue is the need to develop an education system.

I visited many schools in the area of Nepal where I stayed. One has to say that they were very basic. But when we met the children and young people and talked to them we saw their great enthusiasm to find out where we came from and know something about us. That is a clear sign of their ability and desire to learn.

I hope that, coupled with help in developing the education system, we will offer to the Nepalese Government the facilities that we have in Britain to provide further and higher education opportunities in farming, the health service and transport. I am sure that there are talented young men and women in Nepal who would welcome the opportunity to develop their education and knowledge through the services and skills that we have in Britain.

It is delightful to see the Minister in her place and to know that she will reply to the debate. All hon. Members have high regard for her. Even if she says, "I cannot help you", we know that she is one of the few Ministers who listens to what we say and, if possible, acts on it.

It is a pleasure to take part in the debate and I hope that the Minister will tell us what help the Overseas Development Administration will be able to give Nepal.

2.55 pm
The Minister for Overseas Development (Mrs. Lynda Chalker)

May I say how grateful I am to my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South (Mr. Thorne) for giving us this opportunity to discuss aid to Nepal and to the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) for his exceptionally kind remarks? Both hon. Members' knowledge of Nepal is highly respected not only in London but Kathmandu.

It is entirely right that the House should be considering our relationship with Nepal at a time when it has joined us in enjoying a directly elected parliamentary assembly. That change is all the more commendable for being mainly peaceful and well-organised, as both hon. Members said. All those involved deserve the highest praise for the manner in which they worked together towards the common objective. Their success is reflected in the general and peaceful support for the new constitution and in the completion of the elections on 12 May.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South asked whether the House would give a gift to the Parliament of Nepal. That is a matter for Mr. Speaker and the House authorities, but I am sure that he will read what my hon. Friend said.

The House has played a role in supporting the democratic process in Nepal and will continue to do so. My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South and the hon. Member for Tooting attended the election as observers. It was interesting and helpful to hear their views on recent developments.

You may know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that Mr. Speaker has kindly agreed to make available to the new assembly two of the much coveted places on the House's course for parliamentary secretariats, and the Principal Clerk of the Table Office will visit Nepal shortly. That is a good start in the relationship between the two Parliaments.

The aid programme played a part in the elections. The Overseas Development Administration refurbished Government Land-Rovers to make them roadworthy for electoral duties. We donated books and texts to the library of the new assembly. Such moral and practical support is much appreciated, even more so when it comes from the House.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South and the hon. Member for Tooting asked about the future. They may have read in the press that on Tuesday I announced that in the next year Britain would commit £50 million from its bilateral aid programme for direct support for good government in developing countries. I hope and expect that that will include new commitments in Nepal, within the areas indicated for the aid such as the modernisation of central and local government, assistance to the legislature and training for police, customs and civil servants. Our aid to Nepal will reflect our wish not only to help the democratic process but to further the close and substantive relationship that we have.

Sir John Wheeler (Westminster, North)

My right hon. Friend will know of my interest in the police. Is it possible for the Overseas Development Administration to consider a bursary to allow a senior police officer from Nepal to attend the overseas staff course at the police college?

Mrs. Chalker

I shall certainly consider that matter, but I cannot comment off the top of my head. It will depend entirely on what the Nepalese Government want to spend their resources, but I can assure my hon. Friend that we shall certainly look at that issue.

Our support for Nepal is shown by the aid we are giving it. When all the returns are completed, we expect our aid disbursement for the past financial year to be about £19 million—about £1 per head of population in Nepal. That reflects our response to the particular difficulties, which, as my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South and the hon. Member for Tooting have said, faced Nepal during the trade and transit dispute with India. Happily that is now behind us and the underlying trend in our aid has been strongly upwards during the past three years. The doubling of our aid since 1987–88 is a good sign of the growing relationship between the two countries.

Today's debate has reinforced my intention to seek early discussions with the new Nepalese Government. I expect to have a substantial aid programme in Nepal in the coming years. We need to discuss that, once the new Nepalese Government have had an opportunity to determine their policies. I hope to propose to the new Government that we should hold aid talks at official level in the early autumn. It will then be my joy, I hope, to visit Nepal early next year.

One of the reasons why Nepal has so greatly warranted British support has been because, despite being one of the poorest countries, it has shown a willingness to tackle its own problems which is an example to many other countries. It has adopted a policy of structural adjustment under the aegis of the World bank and the International Monetary Fund. It has not been committed to that programme for very long, but the project is already yielding sufficient benefits to show the people of Nepal that it will be worth while. Nepal could not have overcome the difficulties and hardships of the trade and transit dispute if it had not started from a firm economic base. Undoubtedly, those sound economic policies have increased donor confidence, including our own. That is extremely important in a country where 60 per cent. of the development budget is aid funded.

Some 7 million to 8 million of the 19 million population of Nepal live in absolute poverty, by which we mean that their income is insufficient to afford what we would normally regard as a minimum amount of food. The overwhelming majority of those people are subsistence farmers, which is why we have made a long-term commitment to help farmers in the hill regions which are particularly disadvantaged. Our hill research stations at Lumle and Pakhribas have adopted a farmer-oriented approach and are widely seen as the antidote to top-down planning, while our Kosi hills project has made encouraging progress, not least in the management of local communities of the diminishing forest resources.

Unfortunately, the progress that has been made in agriculture and in the economy more generally is being eroded by rapid population growth. The population has doubled in the past 30 years and is projected to double again over the next 25. Therefore, we believe that it is important that we have an effective programme to provide facilities for voluntary family planning, which I hope will be a priority for the new Government—one in which we will be glad to help them.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South spoke about hydroelectric power. I believe that it is important for Nepal, but it is also important that we take particular care, when helping Nepal, to ensure that all its projects are environmentally sound. We shall work with Nepal in that way if that is its wish, but we must be alert not to worsen the great environmental traumas that beset that part of the world.

We help by running the Dharan hospital through the aid programme and in many other ways. We have an aid package of £3 million to help that project. We supply technical co-operation officers and Voluntary Service Overseas medical officers. We hope to build new wards for that hospital to help the Nepalese people. That is one way in which we have continued to help Nepalese people since the hospital came into our care 18 months ago—it was previously the Gurkha hospital. I can assure my hon. Friend that, in many other ways, we shall ensure that the Gurkha hospital continues to be of value to Nepal, but that is an issue for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence.

I agree very much with my hon. Friend that support for forestry in Nepal will be vital, not just for that country, but for India and Bangladesh. The conservation and regeneration of forests is vital to the region. It is good that we have agreed that the forests will be managed and used by local communities in Nepal and we shall help with the establishment—

The motion having been made after half-past Two o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at four minutes past Three o'clock.