Argentina-United Kingdom Relations (Hansard, 17 January 1985)

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)
My Lords, as my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said in another place on the 31st of October 1984, we remain ready to work for more normal relations with Argentina. But we have made it clear that we are not prepared to discuss sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The Argentine Government have continued to insist that any discussions about normalising relations must be linked with discussion of sovereignty; we hope that they will come to see the advantages of a more pragmatic and constructive approach.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness the Minister whether she has read the report of the Foreign Affairs Committee of another place on this issue? Can she respond in this House to the assertion which is contained in this report? After noting that the present policy costs this Government a thousand times as much to defend a Falkland Islands citizen as a British citizen, the report goes on—and I am asking the noble Baroness whether she will respond to this— to say: Some kind of accommodation with Argentina is not only inevitable in view of the cost of the present policy to the United Kingdom but also desirable if the Falklands are to have any prospect of long-term economic prosperity and political stability. Can she also tell us whether it is the view of Her Majesty's Government that the citizens of the Falkland Islands have a veto on any negotiations between the Foreign Office of this country and Argentina? I say this particularly in view of the extraordinary action which has been taken by Sir Rex Hunt this week in promulgating a constitution for those islands which apparently cannot be questioned or debated by our Parliament.

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, has actually asked four questions. I shall try to answer two. The first answer is that I have read the report of the Foreign Affairs Committee and of course the Government will be putting forward their considered response. As to his last point, of course in all matters concerning dependent territories Parliament is the supreme authority.

§ Lord Gladwyn
My Lords, might not the Government agree to resume negotiations with the Argentine, not on the basis of discussion of sovereignty, which is a tendentious term and can mean almost anything, but on the basis of an agreed discussion at the end of the negotiations on what might be called the political future of the Falkland Islands? That could include all kinds of special relationships 1072 with the Argentine and the Falklands. It could include all kinds of very good solutions. Why not agree to that?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, as the Government have made plain on very many occasions, we should like to have better bilateral relations with Argentina. We tried to achieve this in the very long and detailed negotiations that went on leading up to the final meeting in Berne last July. It was a matter of great regret to the Government that the agreement was broken, but the Government are quite clear that they are not prepared to negotiate sovereignty.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, in view of the fact that Argentina indulged in an act of military aggression against British territory and British ships, can my noble friend say whether she is now making any suggestion of the payment of compensation or reparations, as has normally been the case with similar episodes in history?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, no, this has not been a matter which has been considered at all. Indeed, the Government have already taken a number of what we believe are helpful and positive steps with the idea of getting ourselves back to more normal bilateral relations with Argentina.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, would the noble Baroness agree that the Argentine now has a democratic government under a moderate and benign leadership? Is not this a time therefore to seek an agreed agenda which could form the basis of a further meeting between ourselves and the Government of the Argentine? In those circumstances, would it not be quite wrong and irresponsible to let this matter drift on inconclusively, given the cost of the present exercise? Also, could she say whether there is any truth in the report that the Government are thinking of drafting a constituton for the Falklands? If that is so, what is the nature of the exercise and how is this to be done?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, the answer to the first of the noble Lord's questions is as I have already indicated: we wish to have more normal bilateral relations with Argentina. It was to our great regret that the talks broke down in Berne. They were established, with the agreement of the Argentine Government, on the basis that the Argentines would have the right to raise the subject of sovereignty; we would say that we were not prepared to discuss it; and we would then move on to other topics. It was a matter of great regret that this agreement was broken and that the Argentine Government have insisted that sovereignty must be discussed along with any other issues that we should like to discuss with them.
On the second point raised by the noble Lord—which is a quite separate one concerning the constitution—it is only reasonable that a new constitution should be discussed privately with the councillors and the elected representatives of the Falkland Islanders in the Falklands. It has been put to them; but on this basis of the discussion and agreement with the councillors, copies of the draft constitutions for the Falkland Islands and the Falkland Islands Dependencies will shortly be put into the Libraries of both Houses.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, would it be the purpose of such a constitution to entrench the principle of sovereignty? If that is the case, it really will make a settlement quite impossible.

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, as I have already indicated in answer to the Question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, in all matters regarding dependent territories the ultimate authority must be Parliament.

§ The Earl of Onslow
My Lords, is it not true that the United Nations has made it a condition of decolonisation that it should be the consent of the people concerned who are governed by a metropolitan power? Furthermore, is my noble friend aware that three months ago, when I went to the Falkland Islands, it was quite impossible to find but one Falkland Islander who wanted the question of sovereignty discussed?
Further, is it not odd that a noble Lord in this House, who seems to assume that the "Belgrano" was on a pleasure cruise and who advocated the freeing of the African colonies on the grounds of self-determination, should now be happy to advocate the handing over of free-born British citizens to an erstwhile Fascist state?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, in answering both my noble friend Lord Onslow and an earlier question, I think it might be helpful to confirm that the Government have agreed that the human rights chapter of the new constitution for the Falkland Islands should have in its preamble a reaffirmation of the islanders' right to self-determination. The wording repeats the provisions regarding self-determination in Article I of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, since the Argentine Government will not negotiate with us unless sovereignty is on the agenda, and since we will not negotiate with them if it is, would the Government think it possible to make modest advances by obviating negotiations altogether and proceeding by simultaneous unilateral declarations, as described in the report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, this is a proposal which I recognise has been raised on a number of occasions—that we should lift the protection zone in exchange for Argentina agreeing that there should be a cessation of hostilities. We have always made it plain that we do not see that one necessarily follows from the other.

§ Viscount Montgomery of Alamein
My Lords, can my noble friend say what is her attitude to the United Nations' resolutions that negotiations should be resumed, bearing in mind that there is a considerable balance of opinion in the world that negotiations on this issue are desirable, especially in view of the fact that Argentina now has a democratically elected Government and is extremely favourable to Western influence?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, we have welcomed the fact that Argentina now has a democratically elected Government. We hope that as the Argentine people have had the right to choose their own Government they will recognise that the Falkland islanders should have a similar right to their own choice. On the question of the United Nations' debate, the fact is that when we are asked to enter into negotiations we are being asked to enter into negotiations about sovereignty.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, will the noble Baroness answer the question put by my noble friend Lord Cledwyn as to how the new constitution of the Falklands will be promulgated? Is it the case that it will be promulgated through Order in Council, or following a debate in this Parliament? Secondly, will the noble Baroness agree—

§ The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)
My Lords, will the noble Lord please remember that he had four questions the first time? He will be imposing a lot on the House if he is going to have two or three again on the second occasion.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, as the noble Baroness herself admitted, she was going to answer only 50 per cent. of the points that I asked about in my first question.
Without any question as to who was responsible for the breakdown of negotiations in Berne, would she not agree that it is in the interests of this country, of the Falkland islanders, and of world peace particularly in view of the rearmament of the Argentine, for Her Majesty's Government now to take a new initiative to try to re-establish friendly relations between our two countries?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, as I have said on several occasions already this afternoon, Her Majesty's Government would like to have better bilateral relations with Argentina. We have indicated a number of areas where we think progress could be made, which would be confidence building measures, which would be pragmatic and which would be constructive and helpful in the present situation. We hope for a response from Argentina.

§ Lord Maude of Stratford-upon-Avon
My Lords, can my noble friend clarify the Government's oft repeated statement that sovereignty is not negotiable, because it seems to confuse two quite different issues? While it is clearly true that their de jure right of sovereignty is not negotiable, though it might be justiciable, surely the question of transfer of sovereignty in a dependent terroritory has always been negotiable throughout the history of this country. If the Government simply mean that they do not intend or want to negotiate, should they not say so quite clearly, rather than say it is not negotiable?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, my noble friend, with his usual clarity, has drawn attention to a particular point about sovereignty. What the Government have made quite clear in Parliament and have said to the Falkland islanders themselves is that they are not going to enter into negotiations with Argentina on the 1075 subject of sovereignty. I have been asked in various forms whether the islanders' wishes will always come first, to which I have responded that the ultimate authority on the future of our dependent territories is the British Parliament.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that many of us believe that the Argentine has no valid claim whatever to the Falklands? Is she further aware that there is not a single Argentine citizen living in the Falklands and that the way ahead surely is to spend the next decade building up the economy of the Falklands and then to grant them independence which is guaranteed. as we have done with many other island colonies throughout the world—an independence which is guaranteed by a number of countries, including Britain and the United States, and in which the Argentine is invited to share?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I would agree with the noble Lord, Lord Glenamara, that we have no doubt as to our sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. We wish to see the economy expand and improve, so that the way of life of the Falkland islanders may continue and may improve. I have already indicated our view on sovereignty.

Baroness Vickers
My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness the Minister when we will be able to see the draft constitution in this country? I understand that it is circulating in the Falklands. I think it would be helpful to the discussion if we could have a copy here.

§ Baroness Young
Yes, my Lords; I am glad to confirm to my noble friend that we expect to be able shortly to place in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament copies of the draft constitutions for the Falkland Islands and for the Falkland Islands Dependencies.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, may we have some consideration as to when a Question is not a Question and turns into a debate?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Baroness the Leader of the Liberal Party. I think this is a matter which the House will very seriously have to consider. Patience is a great virtue, I know, but my patience this afternoon with this particular very important Question has probably gone beyond the bounds of what the House intended and what the Procedure Committee intended when it set down the time for Questions.