HL Deb 20 January 1992 vol 534 cc564-6

2.52 p.m.

Lord Bruce of Doningtonasked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they propose to negotiate an amendment to Articles 4 and 5 of the EC Decision of 24th June 1988 (Cm 822) to provide for a significant increase in the abatement of the United Kingdom's contribution to the "own resources" of the EC.

The Minister of State, Department of Transport (Lord Brabazon of Tara)

My Lords, at present we have no plans to do so. The Fontainebleau mechanism negotiated in 1984 provides a significant abatement to our contributions, with a cumulative benefit of some £12.5 billion by the end of 1992.

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that after the extremely welcome abatement to which he has referred and after taking into account all receipts from the European Community by way of the social fund, the regional fund and so on, the net burden on the British taxpayer of our contributions to the European Community has amounted, during that period of abatement, to nearly £10 billion? This country, together with Germany, still remains the only country which makes a significant net contribution to European Community funds. Is the Minister aware also that during that same period the dubious benefit to the United Kingdom's economy from its participation in those EC matters has been a visible trade deficit of £50 billion, including a £25 billion deficit on our manufactures?

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, the noble Lord cannot claim the figures which he just quoted are a direct result of our membership of the European Community. That could have happened whether or not we were members of it.

Ourselves and Germany are not the only large contributors. France is also a significant contributor. The reason for our contributions is twofold: first, our share of the agricultural support expenditure is low because we have a relatively small agricultural sector compared to other member states; and, secondly, we are a relatively prosperous member state and therefore we receive only modest levels of structural fund receipts.

Lord Bonham-Carter

My Lords, do I understand that the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington, is advocating the withdrawal of this country from the European Community? Is that in accordance with the policy of his party?

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, I am pleased to say that it is not for me to answer on behalf of the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington.

Lord Mason of Barnsley

My Lords, while recognising that we are a major contributor to the European Community, surely we are entitled to some receipts. One notable receipt is the £09 million of RECHAR money which has been agreed by the regional development commissioner, Mr. Bruce Millan, but the Treasury seems to be preventing the coalfield communities from receiving that money. Why has there been no agreement on that matter?

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, the Treasury is not preventing the receipt of that money. We believe that the Commission is wholly wrong to hold the RECHAR funds. It should pay those funds and should pay them now.

Lord Peston

My Lords, I can reassure the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon, that the Labour Party is fully committed to staying in the European Community. In fact, it is rather more committed than noble Lords opposite, since my party would have been at the forefront of the Maastricht renegotiations. The Labour Party will certainly seek to make sure that in a few months' time it is at the forefront of developments following from that. On more serious matters—

Noble Lords

Hear, hear!

Lord Peston

My Lords, I do not like these political discussions going backwards and forwards. I ask the noble Lord to reflect on a significant part of his Answer. He said that we are net contributors partly because we do not receive a great deal in the agricultural sphere. Is not another reason that we do not receive a great deal not only that our agricultural sector is small but also that it is rather efficient? Is that not a consequence of the nonsense of the common agricultural policy because it does not reinforce efficiency?

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, I am not sure what could be more serious than our membership of the European Community. On this side of the House we are committed to remaining as a member of the Community and have been for many years, unlike noble Lords opposite who have changed their minds half a dozen times in a dozen years.

As regards agriculture, we are concerned about the common agricultural policy and we shall pursue any possible useful reforms to it.

Lord Peston

My Lords, I am delighted to hear the noble Lord's remarks on the common agricultural policy. My point about seriousness is that I believe that the subject of membership of the Community is too serious to be bandied about. Will the noble Lord confirm that his party is united in its attitude towards Europe, especially post-Maastricht? We may then hear some members of the leadership of his party occasionally supporting the Prime Minister on those matters.

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, as I said, we are fully committed to membership of the EC. Perhaps the noble Lord would like to discuss the issue with his noble friend Lord Bruce of Donington.

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, I speak as one who has not changed his mind and who will in due course be vindicated. Is the noble Lord aware that the directive to which I referred in the Question must be renegotiated at some time during the current year in order to ensure the necessary amendment to Article 3 of the directive? Is the Minister saying that he will not use this opportunity to renegotiate the abatement which has so far proved quite inadequate to meet an altogether fair position between the United Kingdom and other members of the European Community?

If he is not prepared to negotiate, why did not the Prime Minister at Maastricht renegotiate Article 201 of the Treaty of Rome so that major decisions on that directive or amendments to it require unanimity?

Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, we will consider our position in the future financing review which is shortly due to take place. However, I should point out to the noble Lord that just as it would require unanimity to weaken the abatement, so it will require unanimity to improve it.