U.N. CONFERENCE ON THE ENVIRONMENT (Hansard, 20 June 1972)

§ LORD BROCKWAY
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)
My Lords, I am afraid that this short Question does not lend itself to a short answer. This was the first major United Nations Conference on the Environment. It was attended by 110 nations, most of them represented by their Ministers. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and my colleague, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Mr. Eldon Griffiths, led a strong United Kingdom delegation. The Conference lasted two weeks and covered many practical environmental issues of the very greatest importance.
At the outset of the Conference, my right honourable friend identified in his speech eight main objectives to which Her Majesty's Government attach importance. It will have these set out in full in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Among them are: a world-wide convention to control the dumping of toxic wastes in the oceans; better international monitoring of air pollution; improved information exchanges; and a new United Nations Agency supported by a Fund. I am glad to say that there was real and important progress on all eight of the major issues highlighted 140 by my right honourable friend. While the long-term results cannot yet be assessed, the Conference undoubtedly led to a most welcome improvement in understanding between the developed and the developing countries on their various environmental problems and priorities.
I will, with permission, place in the Library copies of the draft declaration on the human environment and of the Action Programme as agreed by the Conference.
Following are the eight main objectives referred to: A declaration on the human environment. The establishment of an information system under which those needing information on environmental matters would be rapidly referred to all available sources of information: an early meeting of experts is expected to be held in London to develop this concept. The initiation of improved programmes for monitoring pollutants, especially in the air, on a world-wide basis. The selection of London as a site for a Conference to be held in October during which we would hope to get agreement in principle on a Convention on the world-wide control of marine dumping. The establishment of a Governing Council to oversee the environmental responsibilities of the United Nations, with the necessary secretarial support. The establishment of a United Nations voluntary environmental fund to which substantial contributions have already been pledged, including a contribution by the United Kingdom. A world clean river programme. A world-wide increased programme of technical assistance and co-operation.

§ Loan BROCKWAY
My Lords, I am very grateful for that full reply. Is the Minister aware that I recognise that in an exchange of question and answer one cannot deal with the wide scope of this quite unique Conference? May I therefore begin my limiting myself to the actions of the British delegation to which the noble Lord referred? May I ask why the British delegation opposed three proposals, the first of which was Mrs. Gandhi's proposal for an international fund to enable the poorer nations to have large housing programmes? All who have seen the appalling conditions in Calcutta will understand the need for that.
Secondly, why did our delegation oppose the banning of nuclear tests and the prohibition of nuclear, biological and 141 chemical weapons? Thirdly, why did the British delegation oppose the condemnation of those weapons used in the Vietnam war which caused defoliation and those responsible for the pollution of animals and, still more important, for the loss of human life which is surely the greatest pollution that is proceeding at this time and which was proceeding while the Conference was in session?

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I think the House will recognise that all those issues are important. But there was very considerable difficulty at the Conference in keeping to the terms of reference and I think it is a testimony to the effectiveness of our own delegation that so much of a constructive and practical kind emerged from this Conference.

§ LORD ALPORT
My Lords, may I ask whether this is not a good example of a Question that should have been tabled as an Unstarred Question and the subject of a debate? Is it not unfair, so far as the Government are concerned, that the Minister, in trying to answer a supplementary question which requires a very full answer, is compelled to give a short one in the interests of the timetable of the House?

§ LORD BROCKWAY
My Lords, is the Minister aware that I recognise the relevance of that question? Is not the difficulty here that our programme is so heavily engaged that it would be very difficult to get even an Unstarred Question debated?
In considering the future which arises from the supplementary questions that I have just put, would the noble Lord consider not merely the placing in the Library of the declaration but, still more important, the 100-point Programme of Action adopted at the Conference? Secondly, could the noble Lord arrange for a debate in this House before the General Assembly of the United Nations meets to discuss this matter? Thirdly, would he consider—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS
Speech!

§ LORD BROCKWAY
My Lords, I am trying to put forward constructive proposals and I am asking whether the noble Lord will consider them. I was asking whether he would ask the Minister of 142 the Environment to appoint a committee of experts to discuss all these issues and to make recommendations; whether Her Majesty's Government would press for an international Convention on ocean dumping before the autumn conference, and whether they would offer London as a centre for the new United Nations Secretariat.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I said in the course of my original Answer that the action programme was one of the things which I would have put in the Library as soon as it is available, which will be quite shortly. The question of how we follow up this important Conference in terms of debate in this House is not one for me, but I am sure that my noble friend will take note of what the noble Lord has said. I would confirm that there is no point in having these conferences if they are not followed up but, as the noble Lord will see from the OFFICIAL REPORT, the intention is to follow up the particular one that he mentioned and to follow it up in London.

§ LORD KENNET
My Lords, may I put a very snappy question on the same subject? When will the Government be able to say how much they will contribute to the Fund, thereby following the example of the United States, Japan, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada and Australia who have all named their sums?

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I cannot give a direct answer to that question, but we will announce a figure as soon as we have given the matter sufficient consideration.

§ LORD SHINWELL
My Lords, while it is desirable to obtain international consent in order to deal with this very difficult problem of pollution, would it not be more pragmatic, if I may use that expression, if we ourselves set the example by dealing with pollution in our own country; the pollution of the rivers, canals and so on?

§ LORD SANDFORD
Yes, of course, my Lords. One of the valuable parts of this Conference was that it enabled delegations to distinguish which things were best handled at a national level and which things were better handled at an international level.