THE OLYMPIC GAMES BOYCOTT (Hansard, 6 March 1980)

HL Deb 06 March 1980 vol 406 cc389-535 389

§ Viscount BROOKEBOROUGH
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 support they have received from our NATO allies and from sporting bodies in the United Kingdom for their policy for a boycott of the Olympic Games in Moscow.

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, the Governments of the United States and the Netherlands have publicly supported a boycott of the Olympic Games in Moscow, while a number of other NATO countries, including the Federal Republic of Germany, Norway and Luxembourg, have expressed reservations about their athletes taking part. As regards sporting bodies in the United Kingdom, an increasing number of them seem to be having doubts about the wisdom of going to Moscow.

§ Viscount BROOKEBOROUGH
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his reply. Can he tell us what views have been expressed by the Sports Councils of the United Kingdom and, if they have not expressed a corporate view at this stage, some 12 weeks or more after the invasion of Afghanistan, can he press them to do so?—because it seems to me that, as the national bodies representing sport, it is time that they expressed some view. Can he also give an assurance to all the sports which have supported the Government in their appeal to boycott the Olympics that not only will financial support—if it is financial support that the Government are prepared to give them—be given for the staging of world class competitions for the year 1980, but in view of the fact 390 that it is a short time in which to organise a world class competition that this support will in fact extend to the year 1981? Lastly, will the noble Lord recognise the patriotism of the national coach, Mr. Watts, in putting his country before himself?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
Yes, my Lords, I certainly recognise the patriotism of Mr. Watts. As for the corporate view (if that is the right expression) of the various sporting bodies, they really have not come to a corporate view yet. We very much welcome the decision of the British Olympic Association to defer responding to the invitation from the Moscow Organising Committee until a later date: that is consistent with the attitude being adopted by other Western national Olympic Committees and indeed with the advice given to the association by the Government. As for the financial implications of my noble friend's supplementary questions, I cannot give any assurances of particular financial support at this moment.

§ Lord BLEASE
My Lords, would the Minister agree that the common sense and statesmanlike plan of the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, for a neutral Afghanistan is receiving growing and worldwide support? Will he also agree that at the present time the Carrington plan (as it is being called) provides greater hopes for resolving the real issues concerned than any increased pressure for a boycott of the Olympic Games?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, certainly the whole world is recognising the importance and merit of the proposals advanced by my noble friend, but that does not detract from our view that to go to Moscow in the present circumstances would be wholly unacceptable.

§ Viscount MONCKTON of BRENCHLEY
My Lords, will my noble friend agree that there were some very good athletes who would have won medals in the 1940 and 1944 Olympic Games but who are dead and buried, and would he further agree that that was in part caused by some of us who were stupid enough to go to watch the 1936 Games and by some who took part in them?

391

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, my noble friend is quite right.

§ Lord WIGG
My Lords, will the noble Lord be good enough to say what is the Government's estimate of the cost of staging worldwide games in 1980 and what he thinks they will cost in 1981 and succeeding years? Also, while I would not press the noble Lord to be specific —that would be asking too much—will he give an indication of, say, a percentage that the Government are prepared to ante up, or can we take it that, like the rest of their policy, it is just that they are concerned with words and not with actions?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, that is not true. We are certainly concerned with actions and it is actions that we are trying to achieve in this matter, not mere words. As for the cost of games this year or next, I am not in a position to answer that question without notice.

§ The Earl of KIMBERLEY
My Lords, will my noble friend agree that it might be pertinent to ask the Sports Councils of Great Britain to ask their athletes what it will profit a man or a woman to win a gold medal if they lose their soul?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
That is a very pertinent question, my Lords.

§ Lord SHINWELL
My Lords, I did not gather from the noble Lord's answer what is the attitude of Her Majesty's Government about this matter. Will he take note—because this has a bearing on the Question on the Order Paper—that the United States has declared that until the Russians vacate Afghanistan they will not agree to their people going to Moscow? What is the Government's attitude to this matter? Have we now reconciled ourselves to the presence of the Russians in Afghanistan and are we taking no further action?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
Indeed not, my Lords. The Question on the Order Paper, of course, relates to the Olympic Games. Our attitude is closely in line with that of the United States: we strongly advise our athletes, and indeed our spectators, not to go.

§ The Marquess of EXETER
My Lords, to clear up a misapprehension on the 392 first part of the Question, is the noble Lord aware that the Sports Council has no say in this matter at all;it is entirely a matter for the national Olympic Committee, which is controlled by the 28 sports which compete in the Olympic Games. They held a meeting two days ago and they decided that, although they would not send in their official reply, they would go to the Games, and they have not changed their minds up to this stage. So the letter will go out on 25th March. Is the noble Lord aware that that is the body which decides and no other body has a say in this matter?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I am aware that the position is just as my noble friend describes. As I understand it, the decision of the British Olympic Association was to postpone replying to their invitation. We very much hope that the BOA will in the end accept the Government's further advice not to go to Moscow and will refuse the invitation.

§ Lord AVEBURY
My Lords, will the noble Lord agree that it is not only the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which should prompt us to consider declining to attend the Olympic Games in Moscow but also the Soviet assistance to the repressive réegime in Ethiopia, which is murdering and persecuting many thousands of citizens in Eritrea and the Ogaden, and also the intensified persecution of dissenters within the boundaries of the Soviet Union itself? Will the noble Lord not agree therefore that the advice given to the British Olympic Association that they should not take part in the Games would not be rescinded simply as a result of the Soviet Union agreeing to the Carrington plan on Afghanistan? The Soviet Union would have to show willing on these other matters as well.

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, a Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan, if it were to take place following acceptance of my noble friend's proposals—or any other—would clearly significantly alter the position, but, as the noble Lord has said, that would not necessarily of itself mean that we would withdraw our objections to the Olympic Games in Moscow.

§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICH
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that many of us warmly welcome the proposal 393 of the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary but that at the same time many of us would regard it as deeply reprehensible were British and other athletes from Western Europe to go to Moscow for what in fact is going to be a Soviet propaganda spectacular, at a time when Russian aircraft are bombing Afghan villages?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I am greatly obliged to the noble Lord for that intervention. It precisely confirms our view.

§ Lord BLEASE
My Lords, will the noble Lord not agree that that position was known years and years ago? The propaganda aspect of this is nothing new. The new aspect of this is the Afghanistan position and surely we ought to be backing the Foreign Secretary in his proposals. Is that not the contradiction in the whole thing?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I do not think there is a contradiction at all. Certainly the Russian way of behaving, including the ways referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, were with us long before Afghanistan, but I think the noble Lord underestimates the enormity of what the Soviets have done in Afghanistan. They have invaded a neighbouring, unaligned and sovereign nation.

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, may I put two points to the noble Lord? Did I hear him aright to say that even if the Russians were to withdraw from Afghanistan we would still not be advising or allowing our sportsmen to go to Moscow? If that is what is said, it would seem to me to be an imbalance of assessment. Perhaps the noble Lord would clarify that point. The second point is this. The noble Lord said that our Government are advising our sportsmen against going to Moscow. Does that advice apply to the British media, particularly the television medium?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, if the Russians withdraw from Afghanistan that will, of course, fundamentally change the situation, but I would not want in advance to have to say that, if they did that, without any reference to whatever else they might do between now and then, we would automatically lift our objection 394 to our athletes going to Moscow. Perhaps the noble Lord would remind me of his second point, which I have forgotten.

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, my second point was this: Will the Government give the same advice to the British media—particularly the television medium—about going to Moscow as they are now giving to our sportsmen?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord for a slip of memory. Yes, indeed, we do give the same advice to the media and to spectators.

§ Lord SEGAL
My Lords, will the noble Lord say whether the Government intend to take any active steps to discourage British visitors to Moscow during the period of the Games?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, as I have just said, we hope spectators and visitors will take note of our advice not to go.

§ The Marquess of EXETER
My Lords, may I clear up one extra point? The Olympic Games do not belong to the host country;they belong to the International Olympic Committee. Is the noble Lord aware that the International Olympic Committee take over all the stadiums? That is why when Hitler was there in 1936 all the propaganda was taken down in the stadium, under the instructions of the International Olympic Committee. Is the noble Lord aware that the International Olympic Committee and all the federations which run the technical side of the sports, which are completely worldwide, own the Games? The facilities are provided by the host country, and naturally if they do them well they are proud of them, as all other host countries have been in times past.

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I readily acknowledge the passionate views of my noble friend in this matter and I understand what motivates them;but the fact is, none the less, that if the Games are to continue in Moscow as planned it will be a propaganda coup and triumph of monumental proportions for the Russians.

cc395-7