HL Deb 09 December 1991 vol 533 cc455-6

2.45 p.m.

Lord Judd asked Her Majesty's Government:

For whom their representative voted in the election of the Secretary General of the United Nations, and what criteria were used in deciding who to vote for.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, we have a long-standing practice of never disclosing our vote. We welcome the election of Dr. Boutros Ghali.

Lord Judd

My Lords, I am sure that the whole House will wish the new Secretary General well in performing his heavy responsibilities. Do the Government agree that at a time paradoxically of great potential, with the end of the cold war but also with disturbing political and strategic unpredictability in the East, acute humanitarian need in the South and an environmental crisis across the globe as a whole, there is an urgent need to review the resources— administrative, operational and financial—available to the Secretary General? Will the Government give a lead within the European Community in undertaking such a review?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I am grateful for the noble Lord's initial comments. I am sure that the whole House will join in wishing the new Secretary General well in performing the difficult tasks ahead of him. But the noble Lord then asked questions which are not related to the Question on the Order Paper, important though they were.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is the Minister aware that throughout the world Britain's endeavours on the Security Council and in the United Nations are held in the highest respect? Indeed, we have shown a good lead in every respect on the Iraq problem. Does the Minister agree that while we are prepared to help all that we can we must avoid the grave danger of the horse starving while the grass is growing?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, the noble Lord has made some interesting points but they too are not related to the Question on the Order Paper.

Baroness Ewart-Biggs

My Lords, in view of the enhanced role of the United Nations and the increased number of international problems that are submitted to it—for instance, sending a peacekeeping force to Yugoslavia and intervening in Cambodia—and of the number of international problems still waiting to be resolved by the United Nations, does the Minister agree that the burden on a single person, the Secretary General, is becoming almost intolerable? Does he also agree that there is a case for enlarging the role of the deputy Secretary General in order to even the burden on the shoulders of those two people?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, that too is an interesting point but is not related to the Question on the Order Paper.

Lord Judd

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his interesting answer. But is it right that in deciding how to vote the Government did not have greatly in mind the need for support for the new Secretary General? Would it not be the ultimate in cynicism to put someone in such an extremely exposed and demanding situation without being certain that at a time of acute need and challenge in the world he has all that he needs to discharge his responsibilities effectively? Will not the Government lead a review of what the Secretary General needs and how he can best tackle his tasks?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, the first part of the noble Lord's supplementary question was relevant to the Question on the Order Paper. We wanted the best candidate to win regardless of regional origin. We understand the difficult work that the Secretary General has ahead of him and that is why he deserves the support of the whole House.