§ LORD BROCKWAYMy 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 what progress has been made at the Seabed Conference at Geneva in the preparation of a draft treaty for next year's international conference.
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)My Lords, preparations for the International Conference on the Law of the Sea due to be held next year have been slow. However the United Nations Seabed Committee has made some progress on an international Seabed Convention.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that rather indefinite Answer, may I ask whether she is aware that one cannot deal with this matter by interrogation? Further, is the noble Baroness aware that I have put down a Starred Question only because of the unpopularity of Unstarred Questions? Will Her Majesty's Government consider, when they are preparing this international draft, the advantages and disadvantages of three alternative methods: first, control by multi-national companies which within three years can go to a depth of 3,000 metres; secondly, control by nation-States, which would be a new form of colonialism; and, thirdly, control by an international authority which could use these resources for the benefit of all peoples?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, I think that the noble Lord's question amply justifies what he said at the start of his remarks: it is a very difficult subject to discuss by question and answer. But on his specific question as to whether one would consider three different forms for the control of the seabed: multi-national companies, nation-States or an international authority, that is just the kind of question which is being considered now and which, because of its difficulty, is taking so long to resolve.