§ 2.54 p.m.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy 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 whether they will now hold, under independent supervision, a plebiscite for the people of the Falkland Isles by which they can make known their wishes in regard to remaining under British Government rule or that of the Argentine Government.]
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, Her Majesty's Government do not believe that it is necessary to hold any plebiscite at present in the Falkland Islands to make known the wishes of the population. We are inclined to think that the community is too small for it to be necessary to hold a plebiscite in order to ascertain the Islanders' views. As I have already said in another answer to-day, the power to decide on the future of the Falkland Islands belongs to Her Majesty's Government. We intend to exercise this power in full consultation with the Falkland Islanders but we see this consultation as a continuing process. However, it is too early at the moment to establish definitely the full details of this process in the future.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, arising out of that reply, may I take it that the noble Lord might answer Yes or No to this suggestion: that Her Majesty's Government are already satisfied that it is the overwhelming wish of the Falkland Islanders to remain British subjects?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I am sorry to disappoint the noble Lord. "Yeses" and "Noes" are not going to be in great profusion this afternoon, I fear. This is not only a question of the Falkland Islanders' remaining British subjects but a question of the future pf the territory of the Falkland Islands, as well. There are two questions at issue here. We are fully aware, I think—and I believe the House will be fully aware—of the wishes of the Falkland Islanders in this matter. We have had a good 999 opportunity to hear the views of some of the Islanders, and we have been in the closest consultation with the Governor. We are convinced that we are aware of what the Falkland Islanders want.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, accepting at once what the Minister has said, if Her Majesty's Government are already aware of the overwhelming feelings of the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands, may I ask how they reconcile the negotiations with the Argentine with Article 1, paragraph 2, of the United Nations Charter which is:
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples;Surely they should have shut down at once any talks with the Argentine—for we know the Argentine views—if they also wish to stand by that element in the Charter.
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I am sorry, but I cannot accept this doctrine. We must bear in mind that the population and resources of the Falkland Islands, for which we are responsible, are inadequate for anything like full independence and that the Falkland Islanders really cannot bear the final responsibility for deciding on the future of the territory which they inhabit. That is another matter. This responsibility belongs to Her Majesty's Government. We shall exercise that responsibility in full consultation with the Falkland Islanders.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, does not this mean that the wishes of the Falkland Islanders are going to be completely subordinated to what Her Majesty's Government think are their best interests. Is this democracy or—
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I think it would be foolish of me to try to put any gloss on what I have already said, if what I have already said does not indicate that the wishes of the Falkland Islanders are going to play a large part—
§ LORD CHALFONTThe interests of the Falkland Islanders are paramount. We shall take full account of their 1000 wishes in what we do with regard to the negotiations with the Government of the Argentine. Once again, may I say—and I hope that this will clear up any lingering doubts—that one of the two principles that we should bear in mind in these negotiations is that the cession of sovereignty will take place only after it is known to Her Majesty's Government that the people of the Falkland Islands themselves regard such an agreement as satisfactory to their interests. I believe that makes the matter quite clear.
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that each successive answer he gives makes us on this side distrust him and the Government, and their motives, even more?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I am sorry if that is so. I regret it very much indeed. I think I had better say that we are engaged at the moment in these negotiations with the Government of the Argentine. I sympathise very much with those noble Lords who have the interests of the Falkland Islands very much at heart. We ourselves have them very much at heart. I cannot believe that the answers I have given can possibly have increased any suspicion that noble Lords may have, for I have given the same answers every time—and I shall not be giving different ones, however long noble Lords on the other side keep on at me. The fact is that I have said that we shall not cede sovereignty unless we are satisfied that the Islanders themselves regard the agreement in which sovereignty would be ceded as satisfactory to their interests. I cannot believe that noble Lords would expect me, or would want me, to go any further.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, may I ask one question? If it is indeed true, as the noble Lord has said, that the wishes of the Islanders are to be paramount, what is the purpose of the negotiations with the Argentine Government?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, with all possible respect the Question that is on the Order Paper is about a plebiscite. If I may suggest so very humbly to the noble Marquess, we seem to be going back to the first Question. I fully recognise the feelings, the strong feelings in the House. But we have been at this for some time and we have a long debate 1001 to follow. If we could consider very carefully what my noble friend has said, if his words were studied, I think that a different point of view might be taken on the other side. If, having done that, noble Lords opposite wished to have a debate, perhaps we could consult through the usual channels. I am sure that we could so arrange it.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, may I ask one question about the plebiscite? Is it not the fact that the Argentine Government are against the holding of a plebiscite in the Falkland Islands? Is not that the reason, rather than the small number of the Islanders, why Her Majesty's Government will not consider such a plebiscite?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, the reasons that I have stated why we do not consider it necessary to hold a plebiscite are the real reasons. What views are held by the Argentine Government, and what views they have expressed in their discussions with us, must remain, so far as I am concerned, confidential. The reasons I have given are the real reasons.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I ask a question, for clarification? The noble Lord said that it was for Her Majesty's Government to decide whether or not they transferred sovereignty. My question to him is this: does he say they can do this without the consent of the British Parliament?
§ LORD CHALFONTNo, my Lords; of course I said no such thing, and I would never say any such thing.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, if Her Majesty's Government agreed to the procedure of holding a plebiscite in the case of Gibraltar, with such emphatic results—I ask this question merely for information—why are they not agreed on following a parallel procedure in the case of the Falkland Islands?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I have not said that they are opposed to this; all I have said is that it is too early to decide on the exact processes of consultation.
§ LORD MOLSONMy Lords, I accept the suggestion of the noble Lord that we should not pursue this matter at an undue length now, provided there is to be a debate upon this subject in the reasonably near future. But I should like to ask one important interim question. As the Minister of State is constitutionally incorrect in saying that the Government cannot cede sovereignty without the approval of Parliament—
§ LORD MOLSONWait a minute! Since he is incorrect on a constitutional point in making that statement, can we have an assurance that the Government will not themselves enter into any agreement with the Argentine which would have that effect before a debate has taken place on the subject in this House?
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I have already made that quite clear. I should not dream of entering into a discussion with the noble Lord on constitutional law, but the answer to the question was meant to indicate something that I indicated earlier: that when the negotiations with the Argentine have reached the stage of agreement with them, that agreement will be published, and will be subject to debate by Parliament.
§ LORD VIVIANMy Lords, may I, finally, ask the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont, whether he was able to view the B.B.C. 1 programme "24 Hours" on Monday last?
§ LORD BOWLESWhy should he? He is very busy.
§ LORD CHALFONTMy Lords, I fear the answer is, No. This may indicate some awful dereliction of duty on my part, but I was in fact elsewhere at the time.
§ LORD VIVIANMy Lords, may I ask if I may hand—
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords I appeal to the House and to the noble Lord, Lord Vivian. This is Question Time. If he wishes to give my noble friend a piece of paper, there are other places and other means by which he may do so. My Lords, I would suggest that we ought now to proceed to other business.