HL Deb 09 November 1972 vol 336 cc442-4

3.2 p.m.

LORD BROCKWAY

My 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 how the British representative voted at the recent meeting of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) on the motion to accept the budget, and how many voted in favour and how many against.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)

My Lords, the budget proposed by the Director-General of UNESCO at the general conference was carried with 94 votes for; 19 against, and 4 abstentions. The United Kingdom delegation voted against.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness, may I ask her this question? Was this not an occasion of a disastrous confrontation between the rich and the poor nations? May I ask whether the Minister for Overseas Development, who was at this conference, said, as reported in The Times of October 25, that UNESCO had perhaps reached the limits of its usefulness as an international body? Does the noble Baroness not agree that there is an enormous field for constructive social and educational projects by UNESCO in the developing world?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I have not the exact quotation beside me, but the fact remains that the United Kingdom co-sponsored a resolution which would have provided for an increase in UNESCO's budget of 25.5 per cent. The resolution which in fact was passed represented an increase of 33.4 per cent. and we, together with United States and others who bear the major cost, proposed savings of nearly 7 million dollars.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, is it not a fact that the proposal of the United Kingdom and of Western Europe would have reduced the expenditure by UNESCO by nearly 7 million dollars, and the United States by nearly 15 million dollars? I want to be constructive. While I appreciate that there is a need for an examination of the staffing and structure of UNESCO, is it not desirable that this should be done by some United Nations Commission, rather than by reducing its budget on essential services?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, if we examine the proposals put forward for saving the nearly 7 million dollars we see that they would in fact have resulted in a rate of growth for the next two years of 6 per cent. in the real resources made available to UNESCO, while the proposal which in fact passed, because there were no equivalent savings, would have amounted to only 5.2 per cent. in growth.

LORD WYNNE-JONES

My Lords, does the noble Baroness accept that a rate of growth of 6 per cent. is extremely desirable in this type of activity? Is it not the case that the Government would be only too glad to see a rate of growth in the economy of this country of 6 per cent.? Surely, it is eminently desirable that education, scientific and cultural matters should advance more rapidly.

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

Yes, my Lords; but perhaps I should make clear that the growth rate for the intermediate proposal which was supported by the United Kingdom as a co-sponsor would have represented a rate of growth of the order of 6 per cent. and that in fact is higher than in most other United Nations Agencies.

BARONESS GAITSKELL

My Lords, would not the noble Baroness agree that, although it is very necessary to have a larger budget in UNESCO, it would be far better if we had made a bigger contribution and had had more to say in the examination of the whole organisation, which has done some very unattractive things in its time: witness the fact that some of the books which they have distributed in the Middle East had to be withdrawn because they simply disseminated hatred?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, if it is a question of the contribution made by the United Kingdom to a budget of 120 million dollars, which was approved by UNESCO, may I say that the United Kingdom contribution is assessed at 6.6 million dollars. On the proposal which we co-sponsored, which would have amounted to 113 million dollars, our contribution would have been 6.2 million dollars.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness (I am sure she will be responsive) whether she and Her Majesty's Government would do their utmost to prevent this conflict between the richer and the poorer nations? Is she aware that even yesterday at the meeting of UNESCO this conflict was renewed on the question of the convention for protection of historic monuments? Does she appreciate that one of the most essential things to-day is to get some co-operation between the richer and the poorer countries of the world on these issues?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I would entirely agree with the noble Lord in his last remarks, but we believe that the intermediate resolution we put forward would not only have preserved the main parts of UNESCO's expanding programme without any damaging economies; it would especially have helped the developing countries. That is why we put it forward. It is all very well to look at the total sums, but one must also do so with a certain amount of economy in mind.