HL Deb 02 July 1962 vol 241 cc1114-23

3.46 p.m.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF DUNDEE)

My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I wish to repeat a statement which is now being made by the Lord Privy Seal in another place on the progress of the Brussels negotiations. These negotiations have now reached a stage of hard bargaining, and there is very little in the way of specific detailed progress to report; but the Government feel that it is better to keep Parliament informed, so far as we can, about what is happening, even although the report may be almost entirely inconclusive for the moment.

A meeting of Ministers took place in Brussels from June 27 to June 30. On June 27, the Ministers of the European Economic Community met among themselves, and on the other three days meetings between them and the United Kingdom were interspersed with further meetings of the Ministers of the Community. Ministers devoted most time to the treatment of imports of temperate foodstuffs from the Commonwealth. As my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and I have told your Lordships on previous occasions, this is perhaps the most difficult and complex of all the issues with which we are faced. In our consideration of long-term solutions Ministers envisaged that the enlarged Community should negotiate agreements for suitable commodities on a broad international basis. At the same time, Ministers recognised the need for making alternative arrangements for commodities where international agreements appeared impracticable or had not been concluded by the end of the transitional period.

We also considered what might be the objectives of price and production policies for temperate foodstuffs in an enlarged Community, and what arrangements might be made for the transitional period.

All these discussions have brought out more clearly the nature of our essential requirements in the field of temperate foodstuffs and their crucial importance in these negotiations. We have established some common ground between the Community and ourselves in this matter, and we have indicated to our Deputies the lines on which further work should now proceed.

The other main question discussed at this meeting was that of association under Part IV of the Treaty of Rome in relation both to dependent territories and to independent countries of the Commonwealth. The members of the European Economic Community have now made substantial progress in developing their own ideas and they will be discussing with the present Associates the substance of a new Convention of Association this week. As my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and I have explained to your Lordships on previous occasions, we have made known to the Community our own views on the content of an Association arrangement, and the Lord Privy Seal was able to carry this further on this occasion. Ministers also discussed the procedure that might be adopted to enable independent Commonwealth countries to become associated if they so wish, but the position of specific countries was not discussed.

Finally, the Ministers noted the provisional agreement recommended by the Deputies on the tariff treatment to be accorded to a number of products for which we had requested a zero tariff.

It was agreed that an additional meeting of Ministers should take place on July 18, 19 and possibly 20, primarily to consider the problems of British domestic agriculture. This will be followed by a further meeting beginning on July 24.

3.50 p.m.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, perhaps the noble Earl was wise to add something of his own as a preliminary to this statement; otherwise I might have used almost the same words as he himself used in opening: that is, that this statement tells us very little indeed. Of course, we thank the Government for their courtesy in submitting what I suppose they would call a progress report, but at present it seems as if not very much progress has been secured, unless one reads into the wording something which is not actually there. At the present moment the Government seem to be like the Apostle Paul, who believed in being saved by hope. There does not appear to be very much more than that in it from their point of view.

Nevertheless, there is, currently speaking, a point that I think ought to be commented upon by the Government in answer to any questions submitted by your Lordships at this stage. I am not quite sure what is meant in the first part of the statement by seeking an agreement "on a broad international basis." What have the Government in mind on that point? How broad an international basis? Of the breadth of G.A.T.T.? What are the Government trying to do, when they are raising the question of temperate footstuffs in relation to the Commonwealth, as I understood they were doing? Another thing that strikes me very forcibly about this matter is that there are still references to what I would call temporary agreements—that is, to taking things by stages and to reconsideration at the end of a transitional period. What sort of hope have the Government got to give us at the moment that a permanent agreement is to be arrived at which will fully safeguard the interests of the Commonwealth? There is certainly nothing that I see in this statement which gives us any fundamental hope upon this point. I should like to have some further comments, if I might, upon that situation.

It is all the more important to ask this question in relation to the report I have just been reading again of the speech of Mr. Hare, the Minister of Labour, at Long Melford, Suffolk, on Saturday. In case any of your Lord-ships have not seen it, I may say that this report is very short and I should like just to make it known. It reads: Mr. Hare, Minister of Labour, said at Long Melford, Suffolk, on Saturday, that the Commonwealth countries were 'behaving in some respects like children over Britain's Common Market proposals'. They were quite happy while they were getting their own way, but became aggrieved when 'mother' decided to do what she thought was right. 'The Commonwealth countries are demanding as good terms as they can possibly get', Mr. Hare said". The broadcast report of the speech also added the words at the end that "'Mother' would decide". I wondered what on earth could have persuaded the Minister of Labour to be guilty of such utterances as those at this very important and critical period of negotiations on behalf of the Commonwealth. It seemed to me almost as if he could not possibly have read even the Statute of Westminster, When he put the matter in such a fashion as that. Perhaps we had better have some comment upon that as well.

Then I would ask a question upon the other part of the statement with regard to the association of other territories within the. Commonwealth. In his statement, the noble Earl made reference both to Colonies which are still not self-governing and to the rest of them. I was interested in the part of the statement which says that it was discussed in general and that no specific country was mentioned. You know, really, you have left us, as it were, upon the side of a pool, still fishing and fishing and getting no fish. We do not know quite where we are going: and yet we are being hurried on, I gather from a statement made by Mr. Heath on Saturday, to come to a final settlement more or less by the end of this month. We are apparently not going to get any actual discussion started with regard to the vastly important issue. This statement says that the most complex issue is that of the Commonwealth, but nothing is more important than the guarantees which ought to be given to British agriculture. Discussions on these matters are apparently not going to commence officially until July 18, and there is to be a further meeting of the negotiators on July 24. Perhaps a little more light upon some of these items would do the House a great deal of good.

3.57 p.m.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, the noble Viscount began by saying that the Apostle Paul hoped to be saved through hope. I think he also said that he did not think it was right for him to prophesy until he had received word from the Lord. I have not yet received any word from the Lord; therefore I do not propose to prophesy. But the noble Viscount asked me to say what I could about three questions. First of all he asked what was meant by making agreements for suitable commodities on a broad international basis. I understand the principle is that we all agree we ought to have a broad international agreement for putting a floor into the price of certain primary commodities, just as we have a national policy here to put a floor into the price for agricultural products; and it was generally agreed that, if this could be done, it would be in the interests of world economy as a whole.

The second question which the noble Viscount asked, I think, really partly arises out of that: what guarantees for the Commonwealth can we hope for if we cannot get an international agreement about commodity prices which will have the effect of giving the Commonwealth at least a comparable outlet for their exports on satisfactory terms? As the noble Viscount knows, I think, we can, under the Treaty of Rome, make temporary arrangements up to 1970. If by that time—and it is quite a long time, another eight years—we have not succeeded in making a satisfactory international arrangement which will provide what the food-producing countries of the world, including the Commonwealth, need, then the question is: can we have what is called a bridge; something further, which will go beyond 1970? That is the critical point of negotiation at this moment which we should like to secure as a safeguard against the possibility of international arrangements by 1970 not being adequate to do what we want, which is to safeguard the temperate foodstuffs on which countries like New Zealand, very largely, and also to some extent Australia and Canada, depend.

The third question which the noble Viscount asked was about association with the Common Market on the part of countries which were not members. Our object is to secure that members of our own Commonwealth who are accepted as associates shall not have lesser advantages than those other countries which have already been accepted, or which may be accepted, as associates. The noble Viscount referred to the fact that, in my right honourable friend's statement, the position of specific countries was not discussed; but I think it is obviously better to discuss general principles first, and then the question of specific countries can be dealt with when these specific countries apply, if they wish to apply, for associate membership.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, might I ask for any comment on the Government Bench about the statements of the Minister of Labour?

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND MINISTER FOR SCIENCE (VISCOUNT HAILSHAM)

My Lords, I think there is a Question, either down or just about to be put down, to be answered to-morrow by my noble friend the Foreign Secretary, and in those circumstances I would ask the noble Viscount not to pursue this matter this afternoon, because otherwise it would offend against anticipation.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, might I ask the noble Earl whether tropical products, which are the interest of most of our Asian and African friends in the Commonwealth, are likely to be accepted without difficulty in Common Market arrangements?

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, I cannot at the moment answer that question in detail over the whole range of products They were not part of the questions which were discussed in the last three days, to which this statement relates. But I think the noble Lord is aware that a very large proportion of all tropical products carries nil tariff in any case in the Common Market.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

My Lords, without wishing to offend against anticipation, and since the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition has mentioned it, may I ask whether the Government note that the very forthright statement which was made by the Minister of Labour accurately reflects the feelings of a very large number of the British public?

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, my noble friend Lord Balfour of Inchrye, who is not here to-day, has put down a Question on the statement of my right honourable friend the Minister of Labour, which will be answered to-morrow by the Foreign Secretary, and I am sorry I omitted to say that in reply to the Leader of the Opposition. I think it would not be right to anticipate what will be said then.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I am not wholly satisfied with the answer of the noble Earl to my question about this suggestion of a broad international basis. He replies to me that this course is connected with three things. First of all, the securing of a floor price in arranging the prices—a floor price on a broad international basis. How widely should it be applied? That is a fairly tough proposition to put up. I do not know whether there have been any consultations with other foreign countries, and, if so, which they are. With regard to guarantees, I take it that guarantees could come only from the Common Market. And what are the comparable outlets? This is a question which seems to me to be exceedingly difficult to think of settling, even with years of experience. But what we are anxious about with regard to the Commonwealth is this. We want to know from the Government whether they will interpret the pledges which they have given to the Commonwealth as being that they will not enter the Common Market unless the guarantees to the Commonwealth are adequate in the view of the Commonwealth. I should like to know whether that is still accepted. This is apparently to go on transitionally, over more than one period before settlement, up until 1970, and I must say that I feel very unhappy about it. I think the sort of tangents at which relationships may move, or the new agreements that may be tangents, may have a very serious effect upon our own economy, as well as at the same time upon that of the Commonwealth.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

My Lords, before the noble Earl answers that, may I ask: since when have the British Government abrogated their responsibility? Surely the responsibility of the British Government is to the British people; and the decision whether we enter the Common Market is one for the British Government, not for the Commonwealth or any outside country.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, perhaps I could answer both these questions at once by reminding your Lordships that the Prime Minister stated that we should not commit ourselves until general agreement on all subjects had been accepted by Parliament, and after consultation with the Commonwealth.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

Consultation, not dictation.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

Consultation with the Commonwealth.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

Yes. I say, not dictation.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

The detailed questions which the noble Viscount raised are very important, and we fully share his anxiety about them. I do not think they are the kind of question which could be answered in reply to a supplementary question, arising from a general statement of this kind. We must remember that questions of this sort very often have not been decided by the Six, who have been in the E.E.C. for the last four years. Still less could they be answered by a nation which is trying to join them and will perhaps, after joining, enjoy the ability to influence the answer.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, might I ask this question of the noble Earl, in view of the intervention of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth? It is a fact, is it not, that the status in the Commonwealth of nations is a status of equality? It is a free federation of peoples. Is it not also a fact that the economic positions of the countries are going to be seriously affected within that Commonwealth by decisions taken with regard to entry into the Common Market? Is it not also a fact that the Government were extraordinarily late in having consultations with the Commonwealth before they decided to apply for entry last June? The comments upon that at the Financial Ministers of the Commonwealth Conference at Accra last September, I think, speak for themselves. Is it not also a fact that the extent of our existing economic agreements with members of the Commonwealth is such that surely, before we make any agreement at all, we ought to give notice of the termination of existing agreements.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, it is because the economy of some members of the Commonwealth may be greatly affected by what we do about the Common Market that we are taking so much trouble to negotiate an agreement which we hope will safeguard the economic interest of the Commonwealth. Your Lordships are aware of the more general question—although it does not arise directly out of the statement—that one of our reasons for seeking to join the Common Market is that we believe that in the long run it will be of immense economic benefit to the Commonwealth.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, before we leave the matter altogether, may I ask whether it would be convenient for the Government, when the other Question about the speech of the Minister of Labour is being answered to-morrow, to give the House at the same time the full text of the portion of his speech dealing with the Commonwealth? Because this report I have is not complete; it does not include some of the items which were heard or which were broadcast, and we would be better able to judge the matter if the Government could get from the Minister the full text of the statement he made with regard to the Commonwealth.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, we would all agree that it is always a good thing to read a speech in its full context, and not merely to read an extract. But again, I would suggest that since this question has been put down by my noble friend Lord Balfour of Inchrye, and is to be answered to-morrow, it would be better not to anticipate the reply which will be given by the Foreign Secretary, who will no doubt take note of the supplementary question which the noble Viscount has just asked.

LORD REA

My Lords, might I ask the Government whether they would consider that the Question which has been put down for answer to-morrow should be an Unstarred Question, rather than a Starred Question?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I think that must be for my noble friend who puts it down.

LORD REA

My Lords, I appreciate that, but, of course, it limits the scope of the debate. I think it would be more convenient, perhaps, if it were unstarred.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I suppose it would be most desirable from some points of view, but it would probably postpone the raising of the matter till about ten o'clock to-morrow night.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I think it must be for my friend who put down the Question. As he is not here, I cannot consult with him, and I think he must take his own course about the matter.