HL Deb 07 December 1978 vol 397 cc268-70

3.13 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 what decision has been reached by the International Labour Office on the complaint submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions that the Czechoslovak Government has deprived signatories of Charter 77 of their occupations; what was the vote; and how did the British delegations vote.

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY

My Lords, the complaint made by the ICFTU against Czechoslovakia was that the treatment of signatories of Charter 77 was in breach of international obligations which Czechoslovakia had undertaken. The governing body of the ILO decided last month by 38 votes in favour to four against with nine abstentions that the Czechoslovakian Government's reply to the complaint was unsatisfactory and that the complaint and the reply should be published. The United Kingdom voted in favour of the decision.

Lord BROCKWAY

My Lords, while welcoming that decision, may I ask the Minister whether he is aware that I raised this issue six months ago? Will the publications now be issued in this country and will they be available in our Library? Will the usual procedure of a commission to Czechoslovakia be followed? If so, who will be its members? Further, will this decision encourage the United States to rejoin the ILO?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY

That is a comprehensive supplementary, my Lords. Publication will be in the ILO's official bulletin, of which the next issue is due out early in 1979. The material to be published is expected to include the text of Charter 77, a number of case histories of signatories, the Government's reply and the report of the three-man committee which considered the complaint well-founded. There is no other action that can be taken, except that of publication, which is an exposure to the world of the decision taken against the representations of Czechoslovakia.

Lord CHELWOOD

My Lords, is the Minister aware that the persecution of Charter 77 members goes far beyond depriving them of their jobs, as was clearly shown in a letter sent by the Charter 77 movement to the Prime Minister last week? It was a copy of an open letter sent to Dr. Kurt Waldheim in which it was made clear that members of Charter 77 had been deprived of their social benefits, of medical care, had been driven out of their homes and their children denied education. Is this not therefore a far more serious matter than many people understand? Is the mere publication of the complaint and the reply from ILO going nearly far enough?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY

My Lords, all the matters referred to by the noble Lord will be in the publications. The only action that can be taken is to publish and let the world judge for itself. This is felt to be quite an indictment of the situation arising in Czechoslovakia on the point the noble Lord mentioned.

Lord AVEBURY

My Lords, is the noble Lord correct in saying no further action can be taken? Would it not be possible to refer the matter to the United Nations' Human Rights Commission under the 1503 procedure as a gross and persistent violation of human rights?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY

That is another question, my Lords; I am dealing specifically with the ILO and the decision reached.

Lord BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend to reply to the other point I made? Will Her Majesty's Government encourage the United States to rejoin the ILO in view of this decision? May I ask him to say who voted—it was an extraordinary vote; 38 to four with nine abstentions—and how many of the countries of Eastern Europe voted?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY

The four who voted against were all from Eastern Europe, my Lords. All the Western Governments voted in favour and of the developing countries about one-third voted in favour and two-thirds abstained. All the employer members of the governing body and all the worker members, except the Russians, voted in favour. As I indicated, the United Kingdom voted in favour of publication. The answer to my noble friend's question about the United States; that is a matter for the United States to decide. It is also a matter by which world opinion, as a result of the publication of the report, can influence the United States, but we cannot decide for the American Government; they must decide for themselves.