§ 2.47 p.m.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are still pressing Britain's EEC partners to agree to a minimum safeguard price for crude oil.
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, the Commission's proposal of January 1976 that approval in principle should be given by the Community to such a system is still before the Council. On the insistence of Her Majesty's Government, the subject of MSP was included in the agenda for yesterday's Energy Council, which was presided over by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Energy. As a result of the discussion, the Commission has been charged with further examining the various possible ways of supporting investment in the development of Community energy resources, including MSP. This does not imply a commitment to the principle of MSP by all Member Governments. The result of the Commission's further study, including texts of draft operative instruments, will be referred back to the next Energy Council on 14th June.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, in thanking the noble Lord for that very full, informative and helpful reply, I should like to ask whether it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government still to link our view on this matter with the problem of Euratom loans—I think £300 million worth—for research in alternative sources of energy?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I think that that is a different question.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, I am much obliged and I would not wish to press the noble Lord unduly, but may I ask a further question? Is it the case that we are still thinking in terms of a minimum support price of the order of six dollars a barrel? I ask this in view of the fact that prices have risen very much higher than that, and even if the OPEC organisation collapsed altogether it would be very unlikely to go down as low as six dollars.
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, the majority of the major oil-consuming countries of the world do not, as is demonstrated by their commitment to MSP through the IEA, share that view. The purpose of an MSP in the EEC is to make investments in Community energy resources worth while. If it is never to be used, so much the better.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, may we have a dictionary—RSVP?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I will arrange for one to be put in the Library for the benefit of the noble and learned Lord.
§ Lord SUDELEYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether he could confirm that it is France which is opposed to the principle of MSP? Secondly, may I ask the Minister whether he could mention the various ways, apart from MSP, by which investment might be encouraged in the development of the Community's energy resources?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Sudeley, I may say that seven of our EEC partners who have already agreed in the International Energy Agency (I spell it out for 889 the benefit of the noble and learned Lord) to the minimum safeguard price concept also accept it within the Community. We believe that the eighth, France, will come to accept the idea, too. With regard to the noble Lord's second supplementary question, about possible ways other than MSP, there are of course a variety of ways by which some form of assistance could be given to protect certain of the energy investments, of which our own are very great. These are at the moment under discussion.
§ Lord O'HAGANMy Lords, I understand that new proposals are to come from the Commission on this matter. Can the noble Lord say whether the Scrutiny Committee in either House and/or the European Parliament will have a chance to examine these before a decision is taken in the Council?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I think the Committee, of which the noble Lord is a member, has had an opportunity already to scrutinise some of the proposals. I will inquire whether there will be other opportunities. I hope and am sure there will be.
§ Lord BALERNOMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether in continuing to press for the minimum safeguard price we are not in grave danger of both losing political good will and also of forgoing the chances of securing more important aims?
§ Lord STRABOLGII must remind the noble Lord that the proposal for the adoption by the Community of a system of MSP emanated from the Commission in response to the agreement reached by the Heads of State in December 1975. Our EEC partners are aware that we are contributing 27 per cent. of all Community investment in energy, and I believe that they accept, therefore, the importance to the United Kingdom of protecting this investment.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, could the noble Lord add just one other piece of information to the considerable and helpful information that he has already given; namely, when do we expect the Commission's new proposals to come forward, so that they can be available for scrutiny?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, as I said at the end of my original Answer, the results of the Commission's further study, including the text of draft operative instruments, will be referred back to the next Energy Council on the 14th June.