§ 3.52 p.m.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy 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 conclusions were reached at the seventh session of the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, as my noble friend knows, final conclusions must await the concluding stages of the Conference. The negotiations in the seventh session concentrated mainly on aspects of deep seabed mining, vessel pollution and access to fisheries for States with limited fishing zones or none. We shall seek improvements to the negotiating texts on these and other matters of specific concern to the United Kingdom when the negotiations continue in August.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, although welcoming the progress towards agreement regarding tanker oil pollution, may I ask the Minister to say whether there has been any progress towards solving the claims of the land-locked countries, apart from the derisory concession of a share in unused fish? Also, has any progress been made in the control of seabed mining by multi-national companies rather than by the international authority?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the land-locked and geographically disadvantaged States have naturally come together at various stages of the Conference to press their claims to the right of transit to the sea for goods originating from or bound for land-locked States, the right to be regarded as having a special interest in the international seabed régime and also the right to share in the exploitation of the living resources of neighbouring States' exclusive economic zones.
On the question of transit and the question of their interests in the international seabed régime, I think that we can say that these two points have been broadly settled at this and earlier sittings of the conference. Access to the living resources of the economic zones of neighbouring States, however, is a slightly different and very much more difficult question. This has been discussed at length in the seventh session, but so far no agreement has been achieved. So my noble friend may feel that two-thirds of his objectives have been or are on the way to being achieved.
As to what he said about multinational companies, we are, of course, concerned that the international zone of the high seas should be properly exploited by a balance of initiative from private companies, public corporations, including State trading corporations, and also the international enterprise which is proposed. There will probably be a parallel procedure on this: a one-for-one division of the ocean as between national or private interests and the international enterprise. I should imagine that the role of the multinational companies would be subsumed in that of the private company interest. I see no danger from proceeding in this way; indeed, there is a good deal to be said for the parallel movement forward 1067 whereby private initiative and public purpose are united in the exploitation of the deep seabed.
§ Lord ELTONMy Lords, has the noble Lord been informed by the noble Baroness, Lady Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe, that during his absence we gave a Third Reading to the Tuvalu Bill, the territories of which extend for 360 miles—an axis about which they propose to throw a 200-mile limit—while their dry land area extends to only 10 square miles? As we have recently learned in Africa, that natural resources are a magnet for very considerable trouble, what thought will Her Majesty's Government give to preserve this sort of area from becoming the next cockpit of war?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, we are well aware of the point which the noble Lord has so properly made, especially in relation to developing countries, and he has given a very good example of this. Subject to the decisions of the UNLOSC, our view is that a limit of 200 miles would be reasonable for international acceptance. However, a number of countries —I shall not specify them—including developing countries, have already asserted or propose to assert a somewhat longer limit for their economic claims in the ocean. We shall seek to support the principle of the norm of 200 miles, which is reasonable, but will address ourselves to specific questions, problems and needs in various parts of the world. Without going much further than that at the moment, I think that the noble Lord will agree with me that, on the basis of a generally accepted 200-mile limit, it may be possible to vary the provisions of such a norm favourably to underdeveloped countries.
§ Lord KENNETMy Lords, do the Government think that the text, as it is coming along in UNLOSC, will give the Government sufficient power to enforce in our own offshore waters regulations and conventions which have already been internationally agreed?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, my Lords.
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)My Lords, I think that we should 1068 proceed to the next Question. I detect that noble Lords have had an interesting discussion.