HL Deb 01 July 1986 vol 477 cc771-9

4.3 p.m.

The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)

My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat a Statement on the European Council in The Hague which is being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. The Statement reads as follows:

"With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the European Council of 26th–27th June, which I attended together with my right honourable and learned friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

"The conclusions of the Council have been placed in the Library of the House.

"This Council concentrated on five main issues: the situation in South Africa; the creation of jobs within the Community; the completion of the Common Market; the international aspects of agriculture; and concerted action in the light of the nuclear accident at Chernobyl.

"On South Africa, the European Council expressed its grave concern at the imposition of censorship and the reimposition of the state of emergency by the South African Government and more generally at the deteriorating situation in the country at large. It reaffirmed that the goal of the Twelve is the total abolition of apartheid. It also agreed on a concerted programme of financial and material assistance from the Community and member governments to the victims of apartheid, in particular those affected by the disturbances in Crossroads, and to political prisoners, including those arrested under the recent state of emergency.

"In our own case we shall be making available a further £15 million over five years mainly for education and training of non-white South Africans and additional help for transport projects in neighbouring states. This is in addition to the £22 million which we are already giving.

"The Council called for the opening without delay of negotiations between the South African Government and leaders of the black people in South Africa. To make such a dialogue possible, it called on the South African Government unconditionally to release Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners and to lift the ban on the African National Congress and other political Parties.

"The Council also agreed that the Community should in the next three months enter into consultations with other industrialised countries on further measures which might be needed, covering a ban on new investment, and the import of coal, iron, steel and gold coins from South Africa.

"Finally, the Council asked my right honourable and learned friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, in his capacity as President of the Foreign Ministers of the Twelve from today, to visit southern Africa in a further effort to establish conditions in which the necessary negotiations can commence.

"On job creation, the European Council welcomed the programme put forward by the United Kingdom and some other member states for creating the conditions for employment growth. This calls for the job-creating capacity of small businesses to be maximised by reducing the burden of unnecessary regulations; for improved training; and for measures to help the long-term unemployed back into work.

"We want to see greater attention given to the matters within the Community and priority given to them in the operation of the social fund. This will be of particular value to the United Kingdom. Our proposals were clearly reflected in the Council's conclusions. We shall concentrate on implementing them during the United Kingdom's presidency.

"On the Common Market, the European Council urged more rapid decisions if the timetable of completing removal of the barriers to a genuine single market in the Community by 1992 is to be achieved. This will be another priority for the United Kingdom presidency because of the contribution which completion of the market can make to creating jobs. The Council selected some areas for early progress which are of particular interest to the United Kingdom, such as liberalisation of transport and of capital movements.

"On agriculture, the European Council recognised—as had the Economic Summit Seven in Tokyo—the need to look at agricultural subsidies and protectionism on a world-wide basis. It agreed: that the problem of agricultural trade must be dealt with in the forthcoming round of international trade negotiations; that agricultural production in the European Community should be better adjusted to the market situation, so that the share of public expenditure claimed by agriculture can be reduced; and that there should be bilateral discussions with other major agricultural suppliers to try to eliminate the problems of chronic surpluses and competitive subsidies.

"The Council discussed the lessons to be learned from the nuclear accident at Chernobyl. It agreed on the need for better international collaboration on nuclear safety under the aegis of the International Atomic Energy Authority. It called for general contamination tolerance levels for the Community to be established quickly on a scientific basis. The Council recognised that nuclear power would continue to have a vital role in meeting energy needs in the Community in future.

"The Council also called for rapid progress: on the easing of restrictions on passenger traffic across Community frontiers; on mutual recognition of professional qualifications; and on the action programme against cancer.

"The Council welcomed the intention of the British presidency to hold a Conference of Interior Ministers in the autumn to discuss ways of improving the Community's defences against terrorism, drug trafficking and illegal immigration.

"Mr. Speaker, this European Council set useful priorities for the United Kingdom's presidency of the European Community over the next six months, particularly in the creation of jobs. It also adopted a positive and constructive approach to the bitterly difficult problem of South Africa. We are well aware of the magnitude of the task facing my right honourable and learned friend in the mission on which he embarks. But all who genuinely want a peaceful solution will wish him well".

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, we are grateful to the noble Viscount for repeating that detailed Statement. The meeting of the Council, as the Statement makes plain, was overshadowed by the crisis in South Africa, but as this subject is to be debated in full in the House next Friday I do not propose to go into any detail upon it today. I shall merely say that while we support the Council's general attitude we are deeply concerned and disappointed by the immediate reaction of Her Majesty's Government to the grave situation there.

I wish to ask one or two questions on fact. First, will the noble Viscount confirm that the Foreign Secretary is to visit Washington, or is a representative from the United States Administration to visit this country to discuss the Foreign Secretary's forthcoming visit to South Africa? Secondly, of course we wish Sir Geoffrey Howe well on his mission. Is he planning to see in South Africa Mr. Nelson Mandela and other leaders of the African National Congress? Will he see Chief Buthelezi? Will he specifically try to arrange a meeting involving the Government of South Africa and the African National Congress in the light of what is said in the statement from the Council?

Finally, do Her Majesty's Government support the Council's proposed sanctions? The Statement that the noble Viscount has just read refers to: further measures which might be needed, covering a ban on new investment, and the import of coal, iron, steel and gold coins from South Africa". Presumably those are measures to be taken in three months if Sir Geoffrey's mission is a failure. Can the noble Viscount make plain that the British Government subscribe to those measures?

On other matters in the Statement—and there are several—we hope that the British presidency will be a fruitful and successful one, and we welcome some of the decisions made by the Foreign Ministers at their meeting. Of course we regard employment as crucial. Can the noble Viscount say whether the Anglo-Irish-Italian paper on unemployment growth into the 1990s was discussed at the meeting, and whether specific measures were proposed?

We also welcome the new campaign against drugs abuse. Can the noble Viscount say whether any EC moneys will be provided to assist this campaign in terms of treatment facilities, and so on? We note the reference to the Chernobyl disaster. Can the noble Viscount say whether any specific action through the Atomic Energy Authority is to be taken—action which would involve the Soviet Union as well as Western countries? Finally, on the essential and important point of the common agricultural policy can the noble Viscount say whether France subscribed totally to the proposals in the Satement?

Baroness Seear

My Lords, we on these Benches also wish to thank the Leader of the House for repeating this important Statement about a full meeting in The Hague covering issues of the highest importance. Like the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, I think that as we are to have a debate on Africa on Friday it would be inappropriate to raise a large number of issues, but there are of course certain matters that we shall have to raise immediately as a result of this Statement.

We are glad that the Government went as far as they apparently did, according to the Statement that we have been given, in the total condemnation of apartheid. Can we take it that this means, as was suggested in the meeting that the Minister, Mrs. Lynda Chalker, had last week, that this includes support for one man, one vote, without which I suspect there is precious little chance that we shall be able to establish any confidence in the leadership of the Africans that we really mean business in getting rid of apartheid?

The Foreign Secretary is going to South Africa, and of course we hope that he will be successful. But we must regret that there is a three-months delay period. This is a time in which events in South Africa are moving extremely fast, and it is a time when the moderate, restrained leaders of the African community are under very heavy pressure indeed. Unless they can be convinced that the Western democracies are really behind them in their struggle for the abolition of apartheid, combined with a minimum degree of violence, there is a serious danger that their leadership will pass to people with whom it would be a great deal more difficult to negotiate.

When the Foreign Secretary goes to South Africa after this three-months delay will he really be in a position to negotiate from strength? In order to get the agreement that he wants, is he prepared if necessary to use sanctions of a sufficient degree of severity to mean business? Otherwise, if the South African Government believe that he is negotiating from a weak position, with little determination to take action if he is unable to get a satisfactory agreement, obviously the chance of success on that mission will be slight. Not only do I greatly wish that the Foreign Secretary will be success-ful, but I am also convinced that if there is anybody in the present Government who would wish to make a success of this mission, it is the present Foreign Secretary.

Turning from the question of South Africa to the other matters mentioned in the Statement, of course we are all in support of job creation schemes backed by the Community, but the proposals put forward have a depressingly familiar ring. They are precisely the proposals that we have heard repeatedly in your Lordships' House—the importance of small businesses, and removal of the burdens on business. There will not be economic recovery in Europe simply through small businesses.

It is regrettable that there was apparently no discussion of what is to be done to strengthen the basic industries, the established industries, particularly by seeing that they are able to make the best possible use of the high technology that is becoming increasingly available. Small businesses, without recovery of the major industries, are not going to get us far. One can give only a qualified welcome to the recommendations that have been put forward in relation to job creation. In our view they do not go anywhere near far enough.

We are of course glad that the Government have backed the idea of reducing subsidisation to agricul-ture in order that more of the available resources should be put into industrial development. But we have heard this rather often. We shall be more impressed when we are able to record that there has been a reduction of the proportion of money going to agriculture. So much has been said about this in the past and so little seems in fact to have been done.

We welcome the attack that may have been made on protectionism. This is probably the greatest danger facing the economies of the world at the present time. The EC has not in the past had the best possible reputation in the fight against protectionism, and it needs to set an example in that field. If it was really intended at The Hague to stand up against protectionist forces in the world as a whole, that would be very welcome indeed.

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, and the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, for their reception of the Statement. I am grateful to them both as well for suggesting that we pursue many of the matters concerning South Africa more fruitfully in the full debate that we are to have on Friday. Perhaps for once I may say that maybe in the discussions through the usual channels, in which both the noble Lord and the noble Baroness took part, we have chosen rather a good time for our particular debate on that account, following the European Council.

The noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, said he was disappointed at the reaction. I do not quite see why he should be; after all, it was made abundantly clear unanimously by all the nations in the Community that they totally abhorred apartheid and wished to see it ended at the earliest possible moment. It was made very clear that every effort should be made to that end. Of course there are differences about how that may best be achieved, and these can be argued, but of the need to achieve it there was no doubt at all.

The noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, asked me about my right honourable and learned friend's visit. First, will he visit Washington? Secondly, was he planning to see Mr. Nelson Mandela and Chief Buthelezi? At this stage the plans for my right honourable and learned friend's visit on both counts are still being discussed and I cannot give that information this afternoon. Perhaps by Friday I may be able to give the House a little more information. I shall certainly ask my right honourable and learned friend to give as much information as possible to both me and my noble friend Lady Young so that we can acquaint the House on Friday if there is more to be said. The arrangements are being made as urgently as possible.

As to the position of the British Government on sanctions, it was made very clear in the communiqué, to which all the Twelve subscribed, that exactly what happens will depend and must depend on the outcome of the mission. On employment the reference to "our plans" in the Statement refers to the Anglo-Irish paper. With regard to the question on France and agricul-ture, yes, France did subscribe to the agricultural part of the Statement. On Chernobyl I was asked whether the Soviet Union will take part in any action. I can perhaps stray from my brief for a moment to say that when I was in Russia I found Mr. Gorbachev extremely keen to take some part and I am sure that if he is approached by the Community, he will be most anxious to do so. He took a positive attitude towards that. If I have strayed from my brief, I hope that I may be forgiven my Lords.

The noble Baroness, Lady Seear, wanted to know more about the debate; she wanted to know whether the condemnation of apartheid went as far as the one man, one vote question. At this stage I must stick to the terms of the communique and make it clear that it was totally for the abolition of apartheid. The noble Baroness was extremely generous about my right honourable and learned friend the Foreign Secretary. I am extremely grateful to her and so will he be for the remarks she made. He undertakes an extremely difficult and touchy task and many there are who simply prophesy that it will fail, which is a very disappointing attitude. I am all the more grateful to the noble Baroness. She regretted that there was to be a three months' delay. This was decided no doubt on the basis that it was very important fully to explore the possibility of dialogue. After all, that is what is to be done.

On the question of job creation proposals, the noble Baroness was disappointed because they were very much the same plans as before. One can say with some reason that the other countries of the Twelve have in many cases decided to fall in with the efforts that the British Government are making; and that is some credit to what the British Government are seeking to do in an extremely difficult world situation.

When it comes to the question of reductions in agricultural expenditure, the noble Baroness will know, if she visits some parts of the country, that there is already evidence of reduction in agricultural expenditure which has not proved comfortable to those who are suffering from it or who are probably having to endure it. I hope I have answered most of the points made by the noble Lord and by the noble Baroness.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, will the Leader of the House accept that if there is to be the achievement of a full Common Market by 1992, the European Council will have to urge greater priority for this aim? Can he comment on the apparent paradox of a gathering of the Heads of Governments of the Twelve urging the Twelve to meet their own aims? On whom were they urging the desirability of greater priority? Is the European Commission not the Civil Service of the Community? Is it not the government of the Community, when all is said and done? Would it not have been more appropriate for it to instruct its own governments to co-operate at all levels ever afterwards to achieve this priority?

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, I am grateful for the first comment of the noble Lord. On his second point, I think it is a clear declaration of intention. Perhaps when one wants those who work for one in a commission or civil service to do something the first thing one should do is give them a declaration of intent. That is what I think the leaders of the countries concerned have done.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, does the Leader of the House agree that the EC Statement seems to be at some variance with the views of members of the British Commonwealth of Nations? Does he not further agree that in so far as all of us wish sincere best wishes to the right honourable and learned gentleman the Foreign Secretary, is it not possible that when Pretoria learnt that Sir Geoffrey Howe was going it stated that there was not much point in his visit? In view of that is it not fairly absurd for the British Foreign Secretary to visit a country that does not even wish to talk to him? Ought we not to try to secure from South Africa an agreement that it will be prepared to speak to our Foreign Secretary?

Viscount Whitelaw

In reply to the noble Lord, first, we have the communique from the Community. As yet we have had no meeting of the Commonwealth and no communique from the Commonwealth. The only judgment which the noble Lord has, to which he is entitled, is based on various statements made by various members of the Commonwealth, perhaps in relation to Pretoria and other matters. If everything in the world were governed by immediate statements by people all over the world, and perhaps by ourselves, before anything happened, we should not get very far. It is good to try to see what one can achieve and in some cases it is better to seek it that way than to go down the road of instant statements of one sort or another. I know the noble Lord will appreciate that it is important to do everything we can to try to overcome some of the prejudices. No doubt statements will be made which may not be the whole truth when it comes to the moment.

Lord Monson

My Lords, will the noble Viscount agree that if certain political figures in South Africa refuse to meet his right honourable and learned friend the Foreign Secretary, there is a great deal to be said instead for trying to meet as many ordinary members of the public as possible, particularly members of those ethnic groups who currently have the vote and are therefore in a position to influence events, so as to assess their hopes and fears—I stress the word "fears"—rather than trying to meet politicians whose views are already well documented?

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, if I were to respond to the noble Lord in too much detail I might fall into the very trap I was previously lecturing the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, about. It would be unwise for me to make any other comment except to say that 1 very much hope that when the plans are made for my right honourable and learned friend's visit, those whom it would be profitable for him to see will be prepared to see him and to discuss the problems in a very difficult situation. Many problems face all the people in that country.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, the measures discussed by the EC about sanctions against South Africa can be represented as a feather duster. As the noble Viscount well knows, new investment in South Africa virtually does not exist. Is he telling the House that the Foreign Secretary is going to South Africa even without the feather duster in his baggage? Is he saying that the British Government are not committed to take any new measures if this mission fails?

Furthermore, the Foreign Secretary has said that he has major weapons in his armoury, and he described them as commonsense and moral justice. Have not commonsense and moral justice been present in relations with South Africa for 70 years? Have they ever worked? Certainly, they were present during the visit of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group. What reason have the Government to suppose that where the Eminent Persons Group found that there was no desire and no intention on behalf of Pretoria to move away from basic racial discrimination, another visit by the British Foreign Secretary can have any more positive results? Is it not just a means of procrastination and delaying the inevitable?

4.30 p.m.

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, first of all, I do not accept the noble Lord's description of the measures proposed as a feather duster. Secondly, I think I should make it clear that my right honourable and learned friend is going with the full authority of the whole Community as the Foreign Secretary of the country which has the presidency at this time. It is very important to say that. It is therefore their view that there is value in this visit; otherwise, they would not have unanimously backed it.

Therefore, I must say simply to the noble Lord that the difference between his attitude, the attitude of the Community and that of the Government is perfectly simple. He believes the mission will fail; he has made up his mind in advance that it will fail. I reject that as an extremely defeatist point of view and a very serious point of view, because if the opportunities for dialogue are not going to succeed I am not at all sure—and I do not believe that the noble Lord either is sure—what is likely to succeed in the very difficult situation that we face.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, I was not quoting my words. I was not saying that I believe that the mission would not succeed. I was quoting the words of the Eminent Persons Group. They said virtually that there is nothing more to be done because Pretoria has no intention whatever of changing the basic racial discrimination of the country. Those are their words, not mine. The noble Viscount has not answered the question as to whether the British Government are committed to further measures if this mission does not succeed.

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, first, I must make it perfectly clear that we wish to see what will be the outcome of the mission. That was made very clear in the communique and that remains the position of the British Government. As to what the noble Lord believes or does not believe, or as to what the Eminent Persons Group believe, my experience of politics over a long period of time is that when people quote somebody else they usually mean that they agree with that point of view. That is what I assumed the noble Lord did.

Back to