§ 3.45 p.m.
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)1 My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. The Statement is as follows:
"With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a Statement about the talks I have had yesterday and today with the President of the French Republic, Monsieur Valéry Giscard d'Estaing.
"The objective of these annual meetings is to develop the habit of regular but informal consultation between British and French Ministers so that this becomes the most natural way of exchanging views on matters of long-term importance to both countries. On this occasion, I was glad to be able to welcome the President to Chequers together with the French Prime Minister, Monsieur Barre, and their colleagues the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and of Defence. On the British side, my right honourable friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Foreign and 1997 Commonwealth Secretary, the Secretary of State for Defence, the Secretary of State for Trade and the Minister of State for Industry took part in our discussions. The talks took place in a friendly atmosphere and revealed a broad similarity of approach to the main issues of the day.
"As I reported to the House on 7th December, current questions affecting the European Community were fully discussed at last week's meeting of the European Council. At Chequers, the President and I discussed the longer-term development of the Community. We found that our views were similar. We discussed the important and pressing question of the Community's fisheries policy on which the Commission's proposals will provide the basis for a further meeting of the Fisheries Council next month.
"We resumed our discussions on the world economic situation and were in agreement that it is essential for the OECD and the EEC to achieve their growth targets next year if unemployment is not to rise still higher. Our own fight against inflation, which is making good progress, needs the help of more expansionary policies in the strongest economies. We discussed the problems arising from the surpluses accumulated by the OPEC countries and by Japan.
"In a thorough review of our bilateral relations, we agreed to establish a committee for industrial co-operation, drawn from senior officials of the two countries, which will identify new areas of industrial co-operation between us. These will include offshore oil technology, technology peripheral to the computer industry, the paper industry and the machine tool industry among others. We welcomed the contacts already established between British Leyland and Renault on possible cooperation between the companies which, while leaving the initiative to them, we support and encourage.
"We discussed a proposal for a 2,000 megawatt cross-Channel electricity cable link. We noted that the generating authorities in our two countries are in negotiation towards an agreement and expressed our support for this. We reviewed prospects for co-operation 1998 in the supply of defence equipment, and welcomed the significant progress that is being made. We exchanged views on possible new projects in the field of civil aviation; we agreed that quick decisions were needed on the various options which had opened up and that these matters should be decided on the basis of the commercial and market factors involved.
"We agreed that there will be annual meetings in future between the senior officials of our countries who are concerned with economic management. In a wider framework, we agreed to encourage the Franco-British Council to organise annual meetings, such as we already have with the Federal Republic of Germany and other countries, between leading British and French politicians, industrialists, trade unionists and others to discuss matters of common concern.
"We had a very thorough and useful exchange of views on the international situation. We devoted particular attention to the prospects for a Middle East settlement and to Africa, on which our thinking was very close. We agreed to deepen consultation between us on African problems.
"This latest meeting has confirmed once again the value of these exchanges as a positive and constructive basis on which to build Franco-British friendship".
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ 3.51 p.m.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, on behalf of my noble friends I should like to thank the noble Lord the Leader of the House for this very encouraging Statement, encouraging for good relations with our neighbour and our partner in the European Community, France. We believe on this side of the House that all bilateral co-operation between partners in the Community ought to be warmly welcomed, and in fact good multilateral relations can but benefit from good bilateral relations among the Member States of the Community.
We welcomed most warmly the presence of the President of France, M. Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, and also the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister 1999 as well as the French Foreign Minister and other Ministers who accompanied them. We are all aware that the Western industrialised nations, and of course in particular France and the United Kingdom, share many common problems such as inflation and unemployment, and consideration of these matters in the long term can only be of benefit to both our countries.
We on this side of the House look forward to closer co-operation with France on industrial and energy matters. We believe particularly that co-operation in the internal trade between our countries cannot but benefit a common policy in external trade. Of course I would mention here the visit of Mr. Li Chiang, the Chinese Foreign Trade Minister, who has visited both countries. I hope that joint co-operation between France and Britain will take place so that better terms may be given by both countries in dealing with China.
We welcome particularly the intended co-operation in the supply of defence equipment. We hope that this means that some new steps towards a measure of standardisation in defence equipment is implied. We also trust on this side of the House that the Prime Minister will be reminded of the words of President Giscard d'Estaing when he said that only those countries with a strong defence system will be listened to in matters of international affairs. We would certainly endorse close co-operation in the field of aerospace. Indeed, we have only recently had further examples of the benefit of Concorde which we—or certainly I personally anyway—wish every success. It is a classic example of co-operation in industrial and technological fields. We warmly welcome a link between the electric power grids of France and the United Kingdom, and hope that this will be put into effect.
Perhaps I should speak personally here, but I hope that this is a symptom that we may have other forms of links between the United Kingdom and France, possibly in the shape of a Channel tunnel. Finally, I reiterate that closer co-operation on a practical basis between neighbours and partners is warmly to be encouraged, and we on this side of the House welcome the Statement.
§ 3.53 p.m.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, we too thank the noble Lord the Lord Privy Seal for repeating the Statement. Naturally, we also welcome the outcome of the discussions between Mr. Callaghan and the President of France. It seems to have been extremely satisfactory. As a former Ambassador to France, it gives me special pleasure to think that our two countries are now coming into a period in which our relations appear to be excellent. Long may it continue.
I have only a few questions to ask. In the first place, I note, as the noble Baroness, Lady Elles, noted, with satisfaction that the Prime Minister and the President reviewed prospects of cooperation in the supply of defence equipment and welcomed the significant progress that is being made. I assume that that means that the European Programme Group, which was founded nearly two years ago and seems since then to have been almost dormant because we have not been able to find out what was happening, has somehow sprung to life. If significant progress has been made, would it be possible for us to be informed what that progress is? I hope that the Government can come clean on that. Surely it cannot be very secret. If there is significant progress at long last, can we be informed what the progress is in practice?
Did the President of France by any chance betray any optimism regarding the outcome of the follow-up conference on European security which is now in progress in Belgrade, and was that matter discussed at all? It seems to be rather important. Finally, is it true that the French President expressed some apprehension regarding the possible postponement of direct elections to the European Parliament until after the next General Election in this country?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, first may I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Elles, for her contribution. She put a series of points of view. I agree with her on this fact: There is complete agreement, so there is no point in my raising those issues. I shall now turn to the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn. I agree that, as a former ambassador, he has a great interest in this matter. I cannot answer all his points. Obviously some matters of defence 2001 inevitably might be secret; I cannot say, and I am not in a position to inform the House of the details. I shall look into this carefully and contact the noble Lord. The noble Lord raised an important point, which I accept. It is important that we have agreements with France. We have it in the civil field of aviation, Concorde, which I hope, in the end, will be a success story, despite all the criticisms. On the question of apprehension on direct elections, I do not think so. That is all I can say.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend to clarify one point which emerged from the Statement. As I understood him, he seemed to indicate that the two Heads of State had consistent thinking on the subject of the Middle East. I always understood that there was a wide variation as between the opinion expressed by Her Majesty's Government, and the opinion and indeed the actions of French Governments in recent years. Could my noble friend clarify that point?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I can only repeat what the Prime Minister said in another place. He said that our thinking was very close. As to the details of that thinking—and I know the noble Lord, quite rightly, puts to me the whole question of the Middle East—I would hope that it is that both the French Government and the British Government are anxious that the current talks on the Middle East and also the Egyptian and Israeli dialogue will be fruitful and successful. I would only say to my noble friend that I hope that that is so.
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, would the Leader of the House be good enough to keep in mind before we repeat the success story of the Concorde, that in future when similar projects are launched, not only both Houses but the country could be told what the cost is going to be on a realistic basis? The Concorde success story has cost this country well over £1,000 million, and after every successful flight the deficit gets ever bigger. There must come a point in our success story, however affluent we are, when we go "broke". On that basis, if we have similar successes, it would be nice to know whether we could be told in realistic terms what the cost is going to be; and 2002 as the cost escalates, as it always does, say in tranches of £1,000 million a time, that the country will be kept informed.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I agree with my noble friend; I do not dissent from what he said and he was right to raise it. All I am saying is that I hope it is a success. I should hate it to be something otherwise in view of the amount of money that has been devoted to it. And if we can achieve success in this direction it will give us an important lead in a special section of aviation. That is what I am saying. But I agree that my noble friend is quite right; we must always see to the cost effectiveness of a project of this kind.
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, what about the launching of another project, a cable across the Channel? We have been told nothing about the cost and it would be very interesting to know what figure the Prime Minister has in mind. Is it £10,000 million, £20,000 million or what? Could we be told at regular intervals—not too often; say, at three-monthly or six-monthly intervals—what is happening to the original costings?
§ Lord PEARTAs I said, my Lords, the Prime Minister and the President discussed an electricity cable, but I cannot tell my noble friend the details of it. I am, however, prepared to follow it up and write to my noble friend. I am sure he will agree that that is all I can do at the present. This is a project which has been discussed generally.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord to agree, first, that some success stories are unquantifiable in money terms and, secondly, that it is impossible to quantify in money terms according to the different rates of inflation which we are given from month to month?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, as for the latter part of that supplementary question, I am glad to say that this Government, unlike previous Administrations, will achieve success in this direction, so I do not think the noble Baroness need worry. If she gives us her support for our policies now she will get the right answer.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Elles, mentioned the Channel Tunnel. Was that subject brought up during the discussions? If so, what views were expressed?
§ Lord PEARTI do not think so actually, my Lords.
§ Lord LEATHERLANDMy Lords, my noble friend said that the question of defence was considered by the two statesmen. May I ask him to say in what depth it was considered and whether there was any indication of a closer association by France with NATO?
§ Lord PEARTMy noble friend has raised a controversial point, my Lords. We know the position of France in relation to NATO and I do not want to reopen the argument. I used to press this when I was in another place, when I was involved with defence, and the matter has been noted. I think it is good that there should be exchange and that we should try, where we have joint programmes—the airbus, to give one example—to have standardisation. I believe that France and Britain still have a major contribution to make to the defence of the Western World.