HL Deb 26 July 1979 vol 401 cc2041-2

3.18 p.m.

Lord HATCH of LUSBY

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 whether they have yet taken a decision about the level of British diplomatic representation in Conakry, Guinea.

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, I am afraid I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to the noble Lord on 14th June.

Lord HATCH of LUSBY

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that I deliberately put this Question down as late as possible before the Recess in order that the Government should have the maximum amount of time to consider the issue which I raised before, and which I also raised with the previous Administration? Is he further aware that the object of the Question is to try to encourage, promote, stimulate and assist British trade in conjunction with the Government of Guinea —a country where there is a great opportunity at the moment but which will diminish rapidly as our competitors get in before us?

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, I do not think that our trade prospects with Guinea are necessarily governed by whether or not we have an embassy there.

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

But, my Lords, surely the Minister must agree that adequate representation in Conakry or anywhere else must have a very marked effect on our commercial and other prospects in that country, and that it is an axiom of trade and diplomacy that there is no influence without contact? Is he further aware that my noble friend Lord Hatch has put the Question very fairly indeed? He was repeating a Question that he put two or three weeks ago and indicating to the Government that he hopes that they will consider this matter further during the prolonged Recess which lies ahead. I join with him in hoping that at the end of the Recess there will be the announcement of an adequate level of representation in Guinea, because of the obvious opportunities opening up to us in that part of the world, and the equally obvious competition from other countries against us unless we move fairly quickly.

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, as I said, our trade prospects with Guinea are not necessarily dependent upon whether or not we have a mission there. We have a consul in Conakry who does a great deal of work of a commercial nature which is very valuable; but also there is the question of the commercial implications of our trade. I should say that Guinea's record of payments is not as good as it should be. ECGD cover at present has to be restricted to short-term business because Guinea has failed to meet her obligations under the terms of the 1976 debt re-scheduling agreement.

Lord HATCH of LUSBY

My Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that there are already negotiations about this question of the debt and that there is a much more hopeful response from Conakry than was so in the past? Is he further aware that if he does not know that the presence of an ambassador or, at least, a substantial consulate in a wealthy country like Guinea is important to business men and to trade, then the business world will tell him so? At the moment there is no more than an honorary consul, a Lebanese who cannot speak English.

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, it is not true to say that the consul cannot speak English. The noble Lord mentioned this before and I have taken the trouble to check it. He speaks perfectly adequate English. It is true, as the noble Lord has said, that the Guineans have indicated a willingness to discuss the question of the debt. If they are a wealthy country, as the noble Lord has said, why could they not pay the debt? It is only a small sum.