LAW OF THE SEA CONFERENCE (Hansard, 13 May 1975)

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

§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)
My Lords, the Third Session of the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference took place in Geneva from 17th March to 9th May. At its close, the chairmen of the three main committees circulated, at the request of the Conference, unified texts on the subjects allocated to their committees. These are intended to serve as a basis for negotiation at the next Session, which will be in New York for eight weeks beginning on 29th March 1976, but no delegation is formally committed by them.

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask whether he would agree that it is a little disappointing that there should have been this inconclusive result? Is there not a danger that before the resumed meeting in New York in March there may be unilateral action by certain Governments, because while there was wide agreement on territorial and economic limits controversy regarding fishing limits and mineral exploitation was quite evident? Will Her Majesty's Government refrain from taking unilateral action themselves and encourage others not to take it?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, that is certainly our policy and 596 we shall do everything in our power to persuade others to follow suit. We recognise the danger of unilateral action. I would mention that at the closing session in Geneva the President of the Conference, Ambassador Amerasinghe, at the request of the developing countries. appealed to all States not to take unilateral action towards exploiting the deep seabed before the 1976 sessions, an attitude which the United Kingdom delegation strongly supported. As to the "disappointing result of the Third Session ", to quote my noble friend, I do not quite agree. We had hoped for decisions on some of the major issues at the end of the Third Session. Nevertheless, the emergence by agreement of unified texts from the three main committees, which will now serve as the basis for study by all Governments, leading, we hope, to a conclusive conference in March, is a considerable step forward.

§ Baroness WHITE
My Lords, would my noble friend take steps to inform the House if other countries take unilateral action which might affect our interests or might, for example, lead to the very severe over-fishing of the North Sea?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
Yes, my Lords.

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, while appreciating the second answer that the Minister gave, may I ask him whether Her Majesty's Government have expanded their attitude regarding the function of the proposed international authority in view of the fact that the Third World, and particularly the 49 landlocked countries, reject the idea that the authority should merely license activities but hold that it should undertake them directly for the benefit of the world?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, I do not think I can usefully add to my answer to my noble friend on the last occasion that we had an exchange on this matter. We are on record very firmly in favour of an international authority to exploit the actual deep sea-bed resources. We have also indicated our readiness to consider a sharing of the revenues resulting from exploitation of the seabed between the end of the economic zone and the edge of the continental margin for the benefit of the international 597 community. As to the detailed way in which this can be done, whether by licensing or otherwise, I think that that is a matter for further discussion.

§ Baroness TWEEDSMUIR of BELHELVIE
My Lords, in view of the declared intention of Norway, for example, to extend her fishing limits to 50 miles and Iceland to 200 miles by the end of the year, could the Minister say whether any bilateral discussions are to take place between Her Majesty's Government and these Governments to try to stave off these decisions until a decision can be taken altogether at the next Conference? It is very important for the future of our own fishermen.

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, I fully agree, and very much hope that such bilateral discussions can go forward in the next few months.

§ Lord SEGAL
My Lords, would my noble friend agree that the length of a coastline is a totally false criterion to apply? Ought not a decision to be reached according to need rather than according to geographical situation?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, I think that probably a workable formula combining both concepts and possibly other concepts as well could emerge. Clearly there are problems associated with whether you count all islands, whether inhabited or not. Our view now is that you should count all islands. But these matters, and in particular the point made by my noble friend about the implied interests of underdeveloped countries, are very much in our minds. I think a composite formula will have to be reached before the end of the Conference.