§ 2.40 p.m.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government, in view of the resolution of the United Nations Committee of 24 passed on November 17 last, that the two parties (Spain and the United Kingdom) should continue negotiations and report to the Special Committee before the 22nd Session of the General Assembly, and in view of Spain's rejection of the proposal to take the dispute over Gibraltar to the International Court, whether they would be prepared unequivocally to assure the House that the Sovereignty cannot be regarded as a matter for negotiation in view of their affirmation that the interests of the people of Gibraltar should be paramount.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS (LORD BESWICK)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government regret the Spanish Government's negative reaction to their proposal for a reference to the International Court. The Spanish reply is being studied in the light of the relevant United Nations resolutions and an answer will be given as soon as possible. Under Article 73 of the United Nations' Charter, Her Majesty's Government are obliged to recognise the principle that the interests of the people of Gibraltar are paramount, and we shall continue to hold to this in any further negotiations which may take place.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for that reply. But is it not a fact that last Saturday's resolution in the Trusteeship Committee of the United Nations, which resolution was agreed to by both Britain and Spain, called upon both parties to continue negotiations, and also called upon Britain to speed the decolonisation of Gibraltar in consultation with the Government of Spain? In addition, was there not a statement, in another place on November 10 last, by the Foreign Secretary, when he said that Spain clearly wishes to grab Gibraltar against the 1830 wishes of those who live there, and that nobody could describe that as an act of decolonisation? In view of these facts, would the noble Lord not agree that there were certain grounds for my seeking the assurance which I sought in my original Question?
§ LORD BESWICKNot quite on the basis on which the noble Lord put his Question. In fact, in the resolution to which he refers, which was adopted on Saturday night at the United Nations, there was an amendment which called upon the two parties to continue negotiations, I agree, but also to take into account the interests of the people of Gibraltar. I should have thought that that was something which would satisfy the noble Lord.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord a further question? As Spain voted for this resolution, and it included an expression of regret at the occurrence of certain acts which have prejudiced the smooth progress of the negotiations, and also in view of the proviso, to which the noble Lord referred, that the interests of the people of the territory should be taken into account, would the noble Lord not agree that there were strong reasons for which Her Majesty's Government could press strongly for an easing of the frontier restrictions?
§ LORD BESWICKCertainly, my Lords. In the process of any negotiations we shall press for the removal of those restrictions.