European Foreign Policies (Hansard, 3 November 1993)

§ 8. Sir David Knox
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he proposes to have discussions with his European Community partners concerning the development of common European foreign policies.

§ Mr. Hurd
I meet our partners regularly to discuss the strengthening of intergovernmental co-operation on foreign policy.

§ Sir David Knox
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the development of common European Community foreign policies will be greatly facilitated by the Maastricht treaty, and that that will enable the Community, with the participation of Britain, to exert greater influence in the world?

§ Mr. Hurd
What happened at the summit on Friday illustrates my hon. Friend's point. There is no question of our being cajoled or out-voted, because of the treaty of Maastricht, into policies of which we disapprove. What happened, in an orderly way, was that the summit began to identify and tell the Foreign Ministers to pursue areas where it thought that they should act together. One example has already been given in the House: we shall help to monitor the elections in South Africa, to the extent that South Africans want us to. The same is true of the Russian elections next month: we suggested that there should be EC monitoring if the Russians want it, which they do. Another example is the contribution that we make towards implementing the peace process—getting Jericho and Gaza and the occupied territories into a better state to assume more responsibilities. Those are things which it makes sense for Europe to do together.

§ Mr. Barnes
How will we find out what Foreign Ministers are up to in the European Community, when the Council of Foreign Affairs Ministers has just decided that it is now possible to block the publication of votes that come out of their meetings? We are supposed to be in favour of openness. As a result of the Edinburgh summit of Heads of State it was agreed that those votes would be published so that we would know what was taking place: will the Minister guarantee that that situation will not be changed?

§ Mr. Hurd
There are no votes on those matters—they are of unanimity—and the hon. Gentleman will get his information in the same way as he has always got it: by making my life uncomforable in the House of Commons. One addition that is taking place was outlined by the Government in their recent memorandum to the House of Lords European Community Committee, in which we suggested that Ministers could offer briefings in both Houses on important common foreign and security policy issues. We are willing to do that in addition to arrangements that already exist on the Floor of the House and in Committee to cross examine Ministers and officials.

§ Mr. Cormack
Would it not be a splendid, if modest, start to the new post-Maastricht era if the nations of the Community could ensure that this winter the starving and suffering people of Sarajevo receive adequate aid and that no one is allowed to stop it getting through?

§ Mr. Hurd
It is best to do exactly that. As my hon. Friend knows, we have a strong record on that, both in the quality of aid that we are providing, particularly medicines, and in the efforts that our civilian drivers and troops are making to get the convoys through. The lines of communication through Serb-held territory now work reasonably well. The main problem arises partly from renewed shelling around Sarajevo, which has subsided, and fighting between Muslims and Croats in central Bosnia. I hope that the initiative that we took on Friday will enable David Owen and our local commanders to make it more possible to get that aid through. It is certainly a high priority.

Dr. John Cunningham
I welcome what the Secretary of State said about the practicability of the European Community acting together in foreign policy. That commends itself to everyone. But what evidence is there, from the weak and vague statement on the situation in 338 Bosnia issued following the latest Council of Ministers, that any material change will take place in the circumstances which tragically prevail in Bosnia?
Although I emphatically support and praise the contribution of British troops in UNPROFOR, will the airlift to Sarajevo be stepped up as a result of last Friday's meeting? Will the finance for winter aid be increased as a result of that meeting? As a result of last Friday's discussions, will there be a serious attempt to halt, once and for all, Serbian and Croatian aggression in Bosnia? What practical difference have the discussions in Brussels made to the European Community's common approach to the problem in Bosnia?

§ Mr. Hurd
First, the Sarajevo airlift continues in full flight and at full intensity whenever it safely can and is extremely important, although most of the supplies reaching the area come from Belgrade by road through Serb areas. On the hon. Gentleman's second point, about total finance, we are in close touch with Mrs. Ogata. Our total contribution so far has been £51 million. The difficulty is not so much lack of resources as lack of access, which leads to the hon. Gentleman's third point.
In last Friday's discussions, I was anxious to avoid politicians in Brussels saying that, as from Friday afternoon, such and such a road is open and safe, when within 12 hours that could be contradicted. Rhetoric has been the enemy in this problem all the way through. What the United Nations needs is more troops. I hope that it may not be long before there are, for example, Malaysian troops in UNPROFOR, which would enable troops now in Bihac, for example, to be redeployed along the access roads. We are constantly urging and working for that. We are doing our bit in central Bosnia—the right hon. Gentleman was right about that—with the techniques at which our troops are good. The idea that we could get more aid through by using armed force is contradicted—

Dr. John Cunningham
I did not say that.

§ Mr. Hurd
No, but it is widely suggested—and it is contradicted by all the experts and evidence on the ground. We must work with the resources that we have and try to increase those resources, whether they are United Nations soldiers or money for the agencies. We are doing both.

§ Mr. Cash
In his discussions with Community partners who are members of the Christian Democratic party, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to repudiate any notion of majority voting in foreign policy matters, as laid down in the Athens declaration—the basic programme of the European People's party? Conservative Members will then be in no doubt that our party will have nothing to do with majority voting in relation to foreign policy, and specifically with regard to any actions connected with Bosnia, in line with the guidelines prescribed recently by the Council of Ministers.

§ Mr. Hurd
The position is perfectly clear in the Maastricht treaty. My hon. Friend, and other Conservative Members, may have contested the wisdom of the treaty, but he can now rely on its provisions in this regard with complete confidence.

§ Mr. Mandelson
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the development of common European foreign policies requires the development of much greater public understanding of, and support for, those policies, not least 339 among young people? Is it not a backward move for the Foreign Office to propose cutting off its funding and support for a national organisation that is committed to those aims—the British Youth Council, with which, like the Secretary of State for Employment, I have been associated in the past? Will the Foreign Secretary reconsider the proposal, and stop it being implemented?

§ Mr. Hurd
The British Youth Council has done, and continues to do, admirable work. Given all the pressures on my budget, however, I must consider whether the Foreign Office should continue to support it, and how it ranks in relation to the other demands on my resources—scholarships, the British Council and the BBC world service, for instance. I have concluded that I cannot continue to support the British Youth Council with Foreign Office funds.