HL Deb 08 June 1999 vol 601 cc1323-39

4.27 p.m.

Baroness Jay of Paddington

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

"With your permission, Madam Speaker, I would like to make a Statement on two subjects: Kosovo and the European Council in Cologne which I attended on 3rd and 4th June, accompanied by my right honourable friends the Foreign Secretary and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The conclusions of the Council are being placed in the Library of the House.

"A large part of the European Council was taken up with the crisis in Kosovo. President Ahtisaari came straight from his mission to Belgrade to brief the Council.

"The peace plan which he and the Russian Special Envoy presented to Milosevic was accepted by the Serb Parliament and the Federal Yugoslav Government on 3rd June. The plan incorporated all of NATO's demands. It provided for the immediate and verifiable end to violence in Kosovo; the withdrawal of all military, police and paramilitary forces according to a rapid timetable: the deployment of an effective international security presence; and a civil administration. The document specified that in any such force the substantial participation would be that of NATO and that there would be unified command and control. The force would be authorised to establish a safe environment for all the people in Kosovo and to facilitate the safe return of all displaced people and refugees.

"So the document presented by President Ahtisaari embodied all the conditions set by the international community: all Serb forces come out; an international force with NATO at its core goes in; the refugees go home in peace and safety. But we did not take Milosevic's assurances on trust. The Balkans are littered with his broken promises. That is why NATO has insisted all along that the bombing will not stop until a full and verifiable withdrawal of all Serb forces from Kosovo has begun.

"To give us the certainty we need about Serb withdrawal, the commander of NATO's forces in Macedonia, General Sir Mike Jackson, met representatives of the Federal Yugoslav military on the border of Blace on 5th and 6th June. Those talks ended early on 7th June after the Yugoslav side repeatedly failed to accept the document put forward by NATO. Instead, they tried, among other things, to insist on large numbers of Serb troops remaining. This was unacceptable. However, this morning the Foreign Secretary and his colleagues from the G8 group of countries completed their work on the text of a Security Council resolution.

"I can confirm to the House that agreement has now been reached in the G8 on a text which enshrines the peace plan and its detailed terms. The text is strong and clear and meets our requirements. It will now go forward to the Security Council. It comes under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which means that the resolution will be legally binding on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and authorises, through its detailed provisions, the use of force to ensure its implementation. It requires in particular the withdrawal of all Serb forces from Kosovo and authorises the deployment of our forces as part of a substantial NATO component in the international security presence, which will have a unified chain of command. The members of the G8 who are also on the Security Council—the US, Russia, Britain, France and Canada—have agreed that they will co-sponsor the draft.

"If we need any reminder of the regime we are dealing with, let me give the House one account delivered by a refugee when the UK Government's War Crimes Co-ordinator, David Gowan, visited the Albanian and Macedonian refugee camps last week. A professional man in his late 30s/early 40s said that he was one of more than 2,000 men picked up by Serb forces in early May in villages south of Pristina. They were separated from their families, beaten and transferred to the prison at Mittrovica. The prisoners were forced into cells and made to stand, shoulder to shoulder, for 24 hours without food, water or access to a lavatory. They were beaten again systematically in the prison. Yet still he said that he was among the lucky ones. He had witnessed summary executions when he was detained at the village of Vushtria and had heard reports of a mass execution of 103 men at a nearby village of Studime. So when the refugees say they want to be sure that the Serb troops will go out and our troops will go in to guarantee their safety, it is not hard to understand why.

"The next step will be further military talks to put in place the necessary technical agreement and they are taking place today at Blace. Given the progress on a Security Council resolution, there is no excuse for the FRY authorities to drag their feet again. Provided the Serbs now, at long last, honour their undertakings and begin a verifiable withdrawal of their forces, NATO bombing can be suspended, the Security Council resolution passed and the international force can start to deploy into Kosovo before the end of this week.

"It is time Milosevic realised that the longer he tries to draw this out, the longer and harder his forces will be hit. We have only achieved this agreement by showing total resolve and determination. We shall need to be as resolved and determined now in implementing it. We are close to having all the elements in place. But until we are certain President Milosevic has embarked on the withdrawal of all his forces, NATO's military action will continue.

"We can also now start planning in earnest for the reconstruction of the Balkans to give the peoples of the region the security and prosperity needed to avoid future wars. The future of these front-line states, many of which I have visited in the past few weeks, should he one of peace and prosperity, not ethnic conflict. The people of a democratic Serbia can also benefit from reconstruction and integration into the mainstream of Europe. But let me be clear: that cannot happen while there is a nationalist dictator in power in Belgrade. Until Milosevic goes, Serbia cannot take its true place in the family of world nations.

"Events in Kosovo overshadowed other issues at the European Council. But other important work was clone too. The European Council appointed Javier Solana to the new post of Secretary-General of the Council and High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy. Mr. Solana is a friend of Britain and a highly capable operator, as we have seen during the Kosovo crisis. His new appointment will boost the effectiveness and the credibility of the Common Foreign and Security Policy and I warmly welcome it.

"There was a full discussion of economic policy. The European Council unanimously reaffirmed that sustainable, non-inflationary growth and increased employment required comprehensive structural reforms at EU and national levels. The message is clear in the broad economic guidelines which the European Council approved and in the new European Employment Pact.

"So far as the future development of the Union is concerned, the European Council took a number of important steps. It heard a strong statement from the president elect of the Commission about his plans for reform of that institution. The European Council pledged its full support for Mr. Prodi's approach to reform.

"The European Council welcomed the new European Anti-Fraud Office agreed upon at the ECOFIN Council on 25th May which will permit the Union to step up the fight against fraud, corruption and mismanagement. Agreement was reached on the further development of a common European security and defence policy, building on the ideas which I outlined last year and which were warmly endorsed by NATO at its Washington Summit in April.

"The European Council confirmed that an intergovernmental conference will be called early next year to resolve the issues which were left open at the Amsterdam European Council and which need to be settled before enlargement. The European Council also endorsed an initiative by Prime Minister Guterres of Portugal to convene next March, under the Portuguese presidency, a special meeting of the European Council. This will be entirely devoted to economic reform and employment. The initiative As very welcome and follows the call for such an event at the Anglo-Spanish Summit on 10th April.

"We are making real headway in promoting economic reform in Europe which, as I have repeatedly said in this House, is essential to ensure sustained growth and the unqualified success of the single currency.

"The Council rejected the notion of ending tax competition or of the harmonisation of business and income taxes. Instead, sensibly, it decided merely that harmful tax competition should be avoided and it actually advocated lower business and labour costs. Unfortunately, though we had the support of 13 out of the 14 other member states, we could riot reverse the duty-free decision taken by the previous government in 1991 since they had agreed to it being reversible only if there was unanimity.

"So at the Council as a whole substantial progress was made on economic reform, but it was, rightly and understandably, dominated by Kosovo. Let us hope that the process begun at this Council and taken forward today at the G8 will come swiftly to a secure and just conclusion, ending the obscenity of ethnic cleansing and obtaining justice at last for the people of Kosovo."

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

4.38 p.m.

Lord Strathclyde

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for repeating the Statement made by the Prime Minister in another place. Likewise, I shall keep my answers to the two issues in the same order: first on Kosovo and then on the European Council in Cologne.

Does the noble Baroness agree with me that there is a great deal of confusion on the whole situation surrounding Kosovo as to whether there is yet peace or whether there is yet going to be peace? Will the noble Baroness, as Leader of the House, ensure that we maintain a system of regular reporting back to this House, either through Statements or debates, so that these issues can be discussed in this Chamber?

We entirely endorse the view that there should be a continuation of the bombing campaign. However, is there any truth that the kinds of target aimed at previously have been changed? Also, has the overall level of sorties by the combined air forces been reduced over the course of the past few days?

I now turn to the question of President Milosevic himself. The Statement draws attention to the fact that the Prime Minister will not deal with President Milosevic, but what is unclear is whether that is a pre-condition for the peace agreement itself or a pre-condition that there will be no money for reconstruction until Milosevic has been removed. I should be very glad to hear what the Government's policy is on that.

Next, on the question of the unified command, is there going to be a role for Russian troops and, if so, how will they fit into a NATO/UN command structure? Has that already been agreed with them? As to the United Nations Security Council, what messages have been received from the Chinese Government as to how they see this developing over the course of the next few weeks?

One of the tests that should be set as to the success of this policy is whether or not the refugees are returned home and whether or not the humanitarian disaster already existing can be brought to a speedy halt so that the refugees will leave not only other countries of the European Union but also other countries in the Balkans, so that they can return home. Has the noble Baroness any estimate she can offer as to how long it will take from an agreement being reached to returning the refugees to their homes?

Turning now to the Cologne Summit, the Statement said that, The European Council unanimously reaffirmed that sustainable non-inflationary growth and increased employment required comprehensive structural reforms at EU and national levels".

I am glad that the Government at last are accepting what the Conservative Party has been saying for a very long time indeed. However, what have the Government done over the course of the past two years to further those aims? Practically everything that has been done has been designed to create more difficulties and more regulations for our businesses, rather than fewer. We have seen the Government give in over the Social Charter. We have seen the valuable veto being weakened and we have seen a further surrender on tax harmonisation. In this regard the Statement says that, sensibly, the Council decided merely that harmful tax competition should be avoided. I would be very grateful if the noble Baroness could produce some examples of the difference between harmful tax competition and normal tax competition.

Finally, on the detailed points raised in the Statement, why is it that the European anti-fraud office—which we welcome—is not independent of the Commission?

The Statement did not mention the single currency, but perhaps I may ask the noble Baroness, in conclusion, about the euro. Since the euro is increasingly becoming an issue of public concern, as a matter of policy are the Government pleased with the progress of the euro over the course of the past five or six months? Do the Government think that the level at which the euro finds itself against the pound is about right, or are they happy to see it fall further?

4.45 p.m.

Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank

My Lords, I join the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, in thanking the Leader of the House for repeating the Statement made elsewhere by the Prime Minister. As the Statement says, the Cologne discussions were dominated by Kosovo. I hope it will not confuse everybody if I reverse the order of my comments by saying very briefly that the other steps beyond Kosovo taken at Cologne seem to be sensible as far as they went—which was not very far, but the Kosovo business was pressing. I include in that the outcome of the discussion on tax competition. The Government were bound to lose on the question of duty-free; there was never much point in pursuing this further, whatever their somewhat doubtful merits.

I also welcome the appointment of Mr. Solana to his new post. I am sure that he will serve all of us very well. As the Statement makes clear, and as the House will know since the discussion of Kosovo at Cologne, there has been, first, the failure of the border talks on Saturday and Sunday, which justified the caution which was very widely expressed following the Belgrade agreement. Then there has been the G8 meeting to which the Statement refers, yesterday and this morning. I do not know whether the noble Baroness has seen a statement which appeared this afternoon. When asked who would lead the international presence in Kosovo, Madeleine Albright said that NATO was both the core of the force and its military leader. However, Russia's Foreign Minister, Igor Ivanov, said that was still the subject of negotiation. I hope it is not still the subject of negotiation, because if we have learned anything from the events of the last week it is that we should settle the detail as well as the main principles; otherwise it will most certainly go wrong. If the noble Baroness would care to comment on the situation I shall be very glad to hear what she has to say.

Even if the plan that was accepted by Belgrade last week is indeed fully incorporated in a Security Council resolution with the necessary detail and is then implemented, we must nevertheless recognise, if we are not to be desperately disappointed, that there will be misunderstandings and a total absence of good will on everybody's part. Lives will be lost and from time to time the whole agreement will be threatened with collapse. I say that only because it is best to be wise before the possible event and to be resolute and determined in the meanwhile, whatever problems then arise. The essential key to the success of the plan is the remarkable unity of NATO, which has been demonstrated through very difficult times, together with its continued leadership. That will be essential to any successful plan.

The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, asked how China's attitude might develop over the next few weeks. The most important and immediate question is this: do we have any reason to believe that China will exercise a veto, or do we believe that it is on board? That is the crux of the matter, because unless China is on board, there will be no resolution.

I have two questions about what may happen thereafter. It is not clear from the Statement or from any published document who will be ultimately responsible day to day for ensuring the success of the total operation. I mean by that the re-occupation of Kosovo by its people. Where will the buck stop? If that is unclear, then again I think we shall find far more difficulties ahead than we would like.

Secondly—this is a related question—who will provide the administrative structure and who will be responsible for making sure that there will be machinery to keep the peace, to make judicial decisions and to prepare for fiscal reconstruction? There must also be a structure to make sure that schools and hospitals re-open. These routine tasks are part of reconstruction, and I would have thought that all the evidence is that the Kosovars, of themselves, will not be capable of dealing with that.

Beyond that there are a further two questions I would like to ask concerning the future of Kosovo. The Statement says that military talks are caking place again today under General Sir Mike Jackson. I appreciate that it may be too soon to say anything, but as they have been taking place today I wonder whether there is any evidence yet as to whether they will be any more fruitful than last week.

I have a further two points, rather than questions regarding the future. I believe that it is right for us in due course to be told what the total cost of the operations has been to this country. I say that as somebody who, on behalf of these Benches, has supported the action from the beginning. I believed that we would all have been deeply shamed had not NATO, with our support, taken the action that it did. I think it is necessary to know what the operation has cost and also to know what the continuing costs are likely to be on the assumptions that we are currently making about the implementation of the agreement.

Despite the optimistic conclusion of the Prime Minister's Statement and the hopes that we all, without qualification, share, I am sure that it will be necessary to be cautious and for NATO not to de-escalate its operations and its readiness too fast or too far.

4.49 p.m.

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I am grateful to both noble Lords who have responded to the Statement for the support that they have expressed for the conclusions, especially the part relating to Kosovo. Perhaps I may echo what the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers, said about the need for caution. I know that the Government, and especially my noble friends, who were both congratulated during Question Time today—namely, my noble friends Lady Symons and Lord Gilbert—have been grateful for the consistent support that they have received from all parts of the House during the military operation in Kosovo. That has been very valuable. Indeed, as has been said on several previous occasions in this House, it is important that these messages have gone to British troops so that they know that there is general and genuine support for their valiant efforts. Those British troops will be continuing to play a substantial role in the next stage of these events. I am sure that the whole House will join with me and the Government in wishing them well. In some ways, it may be the most dangerous and perilous part of their duty that they will be undertaking in the future.

The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, suggested that there might be confusion about the next stages of these events. Clearly, at a time when the proposed UN resolution was only agreed a few hours ago and has yet to be put to the Security Council, that is at least de facto true. On the other hand, the intent of the Security Council resolution embraces the points which have been made consistently about the G8 position and indeed about NATO's position, which can he summarised simply by the fact that we must have Mr Milosevic's troops out of Kosovo. We have to have NATO troops in there and we have to ensure that the refugees can return safely and securely. Given that those points are now embraced in the UN resolution which has been agreed and, as I said in repeating the Statement, will be sponsored by all the members of the G8, including Russia, that is an important step forward.

As I said when reaffirming what the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers, said, we need to be extremely cautious and wary in dealing with someone with the trick record of Mr Milosevic in moving away at every opportunity from any commitment which has been given. I believe that the path towards a new and more hopeful position on the military, technical side is now more optimistic than it was when the talks broke down yesterday. The fact that this is now moving to New York and the UN Security Council is a hopeful sign.

The noble Lords, Lord Rodgers and Lord Strathclyde, raised the question of the attitude of the Chinese Government, which is clearly extremely important when considering the matter. Despite what the Chinese Government said in their immediate response to the unfortunate bombing of their embassy in Belgrade, we have no reason to suppose, given what they said later—namely, that they supported the general approval of a new peaceful situation in Kosovo—that they will necessarily take anything other than a positive stand about this proposed resolution. It may be of use to the House to know that President Ahtisaari is today in Beijing involved in talks with the Chinese Government. One has to hope that those talks will produce a positive outcome in terms of their support for the resolution when it reaches the Security Council in New York.

The difficult situation about the Russian troops was mentioned; namely, what their presence will be and under whose command they will serve. Noble Lords will be aware that this is one of the continuing questions which has arisen in the discussions with the Russian Government. Because they have agreed to co-sponsor the UN resolution, which mentions the very central point that suggests that NATO will be at the core of the force that will be in Kosovo—of KFOR—and that it will be led by NATO, it is now recognised that there has been a change in their position. As far as concerns the practicalities, people are drawing on the positive experience of what has happened in Bosnia, where the Russian troops have served in a NATO force though not directly under a NATO commander. Those points of difficulty may well be ironed out in much the same way when the practical problems are addressed.

The question about the continuing presence of an authority which is not a civil authority was also raised. Indeed, this was a point which the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers, was most concerned about in relation to the organisation and administration of life within Kosovo outside the purely defence and military situation. The draft resolution, as agreed by G8, makes provision for the appointment from the UN of someone who will, as it were, take responsibility for the civil authority in relationship to the secretary general and, through him, to the Security Council of the UN. That task will be extremely difficult and there will need to be close collaboration and co-operation with the military forces. However, that issue has been specifically addressed within the draft resolution and is something which will need to be worked out—again perhaps drawing on the experience of Bosnia and other arrangements where a civil administration of that kind has been established.

I move on to the broader questions of the Council's discussions and debates on the future of employment in Europe; and, indeed, the questions which the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, raised about the euro and activity on the general economic and administrative front. The noble Lord mentioned the implementation of some of the policies which the Government have undertaken during the past two years—for example, he mentioned the social chapter. However, I would also mention matters relating to the minimum wage resolutions, the parental leave regulations, and so on, which have been welcomed by many people. This Government are proud to have implemented those measures and we do not feel that there is anything there that we should retreat from at this stage.

The noble Lord mentioned the employment pact, which has three pillars. First, it involves macro-economic dialogue between the member states aimed at preserving non-inflationary growth. Secondly, it intends to promote employability and entrepreneurship through a co-ordinated employment strategy which we hope will improve the efficiency of the labour markets; and, thirdly, it includes, as the Statement said, comprehensive structural reform and modernisation to improve the innovative capacity and efficiency of the labour markets and markets in goods, services and capital. The details of these are to be found in the conclusions of the Council which, as I said when repeating the Statement, have been placed in the Library of the House.

On the question of the anti-fraud measures and whether the Government believe that this is appropriately placed within the Commission, the Government are happy that they are within the Commission because this is being run on an independent basis. Clearly, anyone who is going to tackle fraud within the Community, the Commission or wherever it may lie needs to have the detailed information about the organisation of that body and an understanding of the detail of the official arrangements which may or may not have been called into question. It seems to the Government and, indeed, to the Council to be appropriate that it should be placed within the organisation rather than attempting to investigate from without.

The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, raised a further point about the euro. As the House will know, the Government's position on this is basically unchanged. We have always said that if the economic conditions on the euro were right and stability maintained, it would clearly be in this country's interest at some stage to hold a referendum to see whether moving into the euro in the long term would be something which the country supported. I can only suggest to the noble Lord that I believe there is a difference between some of these matters. As he will know, I entirely respect his position; but there is a difference in many of these matters between taking what could be perceived as a short-term political practical position and a long-term strategic view which we hope will benefit the country in much the same way as we hope the benefits to the people of Kosovo will be achieved in the long-term peaceful resolution of the discord and terrible tragedy that we have seen there recently.

Lord Strathclyde

My Lords, on a point of clarification, I asked about harmful tax competition and whether a definition of that existed. Perhaps the noble Baroness will write to me on the point. As regards the euro, I did not seek a justification for the Government's desire to join the euro; I asked whether they were happy with the level of the pound vis-à-vis the euro.

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, as I understand the position, the pound is at roughly the same level vis-à-vis the euro as it was this time last year. Noble Lords may feel that that was because of an inflationary situation in the earlier period. However, the balance has probably worked both ways. Whether one is in favour of the pound being in a position of strength vis-à-vis the euro depends on one's situation. I refer particularly to those involved in the manufacturing industry.

As regards tax competitiveness, I am perfectly happy to write to the noble Lord about the details of the Council's resolutions on that. As regards the need to preserve the important mainstream tax sovereignty—if one wants to put it that way—the Government have always taken the view that we would protect and preserve that position. Tax harmonisation could perhaps be relevant in some areas where it could offer an advantage. However, as regards mainstream tax issues, the United Kingdom maintains—unfortunately this worked to our disadvantage on the question of duty free goods—that unanimity is required in the Council before any changes can be made.

5.2 p.m.

I.ord Shore of Stepney

My Lords, I too thank my noble friend for repeating this Statement. I shall not pursue the question of Kosovo on this occasion, partly because of the rapid changes that seem to be taking place almost hour by hour in the negotiations there and also because, frankly, we need a debate on the matter. I shall content myself with simply urging my noble friend to arrange an early occasion when we can give our full attention to this serious and still unfolding tragedy.

I turn to other points in the no fewer than 39 pages of the presidency conclusions. In particular, I wish to ask my noble friend some questions relating to this obvious drive now to create a European security and defence capacity. The words are used, "An autonomous European defence capacity". I wish to ask the following questions. First, in defining the purposes of that capacity—I refer to the mention of the Petersberg tasks—am I right in believing that the business of actually waging war (that is, engaging enemy forces in a hostile rather than a permissive environment) is not covered by the Petersberg tasks definition? If it is covered by it, can my noble friend tell me what is the advantage, as it were, of creating and duplicating such facilities as to make the waging of war possible on a European Union basis? Why should it be better, and more likely to lead to success, than using NATO, which brings North America, with all its resolve and its power, to the assistance of its European friends and allies?

Finally, whatever arrangements are made with the European Union, will my noble friend assure me and others that the UK will maintain sufficient capacity under its own direct control to carry out tasks involving security and the use of force outside Europe (that is, in places such as Iraq and elsewhere) and that we shall not he, as it were, corralled into purely European Union and European continental actions in the future?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his comments. As he will know, any discussion about whether we should have a full-scale debate on these matters would have to be agreed through the usual channels. It is appropriate that we discuss these matters in detail. I think my noble friend will agree—I hope that the House will agree—that there have been opportunities during the past few weeks to do this on a regular basis. If this matter becomes continuously relevant—as the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, suggested—I am sure that the usual channels will make arrangements to hold those discussions.

As I understand the position, the Petersberg tasks are essentially directed towards the peace-keeping arrangements rather than war-making, to use the rather graphic expression of my noble friend. NATO will of course retain the primary role in any kind of involvement that our forces are engaged in.

As regards the matters which have been discussed under the common and foreign security policy arrangements, the emphasis is on a more effective use of European forces rather than engaging in sonic new, pro-active initiatives which might stretch our forces, as my noble friend suggests. There is nothing to suggest that we are going against any of the broader and more widespread recommendations which were agreed under the Strategic Defence Review which would naturally enable this country to maintain its own independent forces.

Viscount Cranborne

My Lords, in view of the comments of the noble Baroness about tax harmonisation, can she tell us whether that means that the City of London no longer has to fear a European imposed withholding tax? As regards Kosovo, does the noble Baroness agree that what we now face is a long-term protectorate, not only in Bosnia but also in Kosovo, backed by military force? As that is the case, and in view of the fact that the Armed Forces—and the Army in particular—are already scrabbling around to find reserves to fulfil their existing commitments, where will the Army find the soldiers not only for the first six months' tour but also for subsequent tours in the Balkans, particularly if we face increasing demands on our troops to fulfil a role in Northern Ireland?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I am happy to tell the noble Viscount that the progress report on tax arrangements which was agreed and endorsed in Cologne—the reinforced tax policy co-operation—referred specifically to, the need to preserve the competitiveness of European financial markets". I imagine that the City will feel reasonably reassured on that point.

As regards the noble Viscount's concern about the long-term situation in Kosovo, my right honourable friends the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, and everyone else who has spoken on this subject, have made it clear that there is undoubtedly a long-term commitment in Kosovo, as it is obvious from everything that has happened and from everything that has been reported in the past few days that there is no question of refugees feeling confident of returning if all they are provided with is a short-term escort which did not subsequently maintain a presence.

As regards our ability to fulfil our obligations, there will of course be many other nations involved in the force. As I said in my initial response to the noble Lords, Lord Strathclyde and Lord Rodgers, we can be proud of the leadership role which the British forces have played and will play in this situation. However, there will be many others involved, including people outside NATO. Noble Lords can feel confident that we would not accept an undertaking which we did not feel we could fulfil and in many instances lead.

Lord Clinton-Davis

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the real possibility of peace in Kosovo arises very substantially from the strong resolve shown by the Prime Minister and others—but notably by the Prime Minister—in the face of some equivocation, particularly on the part of the Opposition in another place? Does my noble friend further agree that without that resolve the possibility of building up an enduring state of peace and some prosperity for the people of Kosovo would have been quite impossible?

Is my noble friend prepared to say something about the preparations that are being undertaken to bring stability to the people of Kosovo and the other areas affected through a massive programme of reconstruction following a peace situation?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I endorse what my noble friend said about the role and the resolution of the Prime Minister. One must also reconfirm and restate the enormous importance attached to the fact that NATO and the 19 countries which have been involved in the military action in the Balkans have stayed together in a positive alliance. That has enabled the kind of progress to be made which I hope we are able to say is reaching some sort of peaceful conclusion today.

My noble friend is concerned about some of the remarks which have been made in another place in a more "political atmosphere", if I can put it that way. But I repeat what I said in my earlier remarks—which both of my noble friends sitting beside me on the Front Bench will reconfirm—that the support for the action taken has been very important in this House. I know that my noble friends have been grateful for that, as indeed have I and other Ministers.

As to the question of long-term reconstruction, that is the major issue which will concern everyone once the military organisation is in place. It will be an enormously important and probably very expensive task. Not only in terms of money but in terms of technological assistance. it will require international co-operation on a scale that is being talked of in the context of the Marshall Plan in Western Europe after the Second World War. Some preliminary discussions are under way through the international organisations, both those concerned with the monetary side, for example, the IBRD, and the organisational side through certain of the UN agencies. They are beginning to look at the matter. It is at a preliminary stage but I can assure my noble friend that urgent international discussions are going on. As I have said, this is the long-term problem which we all now have to confront.

Baroness Williams of Crosby

My Lords, with regard to the Cologne Summit, can the Leader of the House confirm that the holding of an IGC next year will not delay the process of enlargement, which of course requires institutional reform?

As to Kosovo, perhaps I may ask the noble Baroness two questions. First, newspaper reports suggest that the build-up of the force in Macedonia is being somewhat slowed down because contributions from some other countries are coming through only slowly. Can she confirm or deny those newspaper reports? Related to that matter, can she also comment on Mr. De Melo's statement that we will be lucky to get the refugees back before winter and that steps will have to be taken to "winterise" their quarters?

Finally, I express concern about the noble Baroness's references to Bosnia. I think she will agree that Bosnia has not been a wholly successful operation. It has been ethnically very divided; in some cases local authorities will not accept back refugees from an ethnic group other than their own. Can she at least promise that the Government will look carefully at the arrangements on the civil side for Kosovo to ensure that we do not repeat the mistakes of Bosnia, which included offering only a helping hand to local bodies and not using Bosnian refugees as a major element in the reconstruction of their country?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, perhaps I may first pick up the point made by the noble Baroness about the IGC. The proposed agenda—albeit in a skeletal form; the IGC is not due to be held until the spring of next year—will deal, as the Statement said, with some of the issues left unresolved from Amsterdam; for example, the size and composition of the Commission, the weighting of votes in the Council and possibly the extension of qualified majority voting in the Council. I understand that there is not to be, as it were, a parallel track between the resolution of those problems and discussions upon enlargement. Of course. if enlargement is to take place along the lines that have been discussed, it is necessary that some of those issues are resolved in order to improve the effective workings of the Commission and the other bodies involved.

As to the questions relating to Kosovo, I understand that the problems of getting forces into Kosovo are caused not by a lack of political will but by some bottlenecks at the Greek ports. They have had a partly political dimension in Greece; but this has not been the fault of the suppliers of the forces concerned. There is no concern that the build-up will progress along the lines that it is.

Perhaps I may now turn to Bosnia. We can learn from both the positive and negative lessons of Bosnia. I referred to the positive lesson in my initial reply to the noble Lords, Lord Strathclyde and Lord Rodgers. That concerned the way in which the Russians had agreed to serve in Bosnia under a command which they understood was in some sense a NATO command but had no sensitivities about being NATO led. That was my main point. I agree with the noble Baroness that there are lessons which need to be learned in the negative as well as the positive sense.

The issues concerning the returning refugees are essentially a question of timing. We can only be grateful that we have come to the situation that we are now at, where at least there seems to be a possibility of movement on the return of the refugees. I have reiterated several times that the refugees will not go back unless they feel confident that a NATO force and a substantial military presence is in Kosovo. There is a time-line between achieving that result and the onset of the Balkan winter. That is why the NATO Council and all of those involved have been particularly glad that some resolution of the conflict seems to be taking place at a time when at least it is possible to contemplate that a substantial movement back into Kosovo will happen before the weather gets too bad.

Lord Hardy of Wath

My Lords, I have a short question.

The Earl of Lauderdale

My Lords—

Baroness Amos

My Lords, there are five minutes left. May I suggest that we first take a question from that side of the House and then a question from this side.

The Earl of Lauderdale

My Lords, I wish to ask two questions. First, how is it that the Statement completely ignores the existence, the uprising and the invasion of the Kosovo Liberation Army? Its activities provoked the atrocities that everyone complains about.

My second question is altogether different. How is it that it has taken seven weeks of illegal attack by NATO before there is any endeavour to get a proper United Nations' authorisation for what has been going on? That is a very serious question. We are accustomed in this country to observing international law and international peace. Those operations, albeit by NATO, have violated that tradition and have been unauthorised by the United Nations.

How is it that the position of the Kosovo Liberation Army is completely ignored in the Statement? Its invasion and uprising sparked off the original atrocities.

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I am surprised that the noble Earl says that the KLA was not mentioned. It was not actually mentioned in my right honourable friend's Statement but it has certainly been part of the understandings of the G8. As I understand it, it is part of the draft resolution to the Security Council that the KLA should be demilitarised. That has been said now for some time. I am surprised that the noble Earl said that it was not mentioned.

On the question of illegality, my noble friends and I have repeated on several occasions in this House that, although there was no specific authorisation—a matter that we have discussed—this action was taken as an exceptional measure to halt an overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe. When Security Council debates took place on 24th and 26th March, strong support was given for NATO action, and the Russian draft resolution criticising NATO action was defeated by 12 votes to three.

Of course we all feel that it is now appropriate to try to achieve the Security Council resolution to take forward the peacemaking efforts that I have described and which were referred to in the Statement. But to say that the KLA has not been mentioned is not right. It has been mentioned; and it has been asked to demilitarise.

Lord Hardy of Wath

My Lords, perhaps I may put a short question—

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords—

Lord Clark of Kempston

My Lords—

Baroness Amos

My Lords, I think that a question from this side would be appropriate.

Lord Hardy of Wath

My Lords, does my noble friend accept—

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, I think—

Lord Clark of Kempston

My Lords, in view of the fact—

Baroness Amos

My Lords, we are taking up valuable time. I did say that the noble Lord would put his question next.

Lord Hardy of Wath

My Lords, the Serbs have planted large numbers of mines in Kosovo. Does my noble friend accept that the Government should insist that those mines are cleared before the bombing ceases, and on an absolute guarantee that they will be?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lord as to a guarantee that the mines should be cleared before the bombing ceases, militarily and in terms of the technical arrangements and all the difficult issues that must be kept in play that would be very difficult.

The question of the mines has been fully appreciated in the military technical talks that are taking place today. There may be a limited allowance for a very small number of Serbian forces to remain in Kosovo simply to identify where the mines are in order to help the NATO forces when they attempt to make the passage back into Kosovo safe. It will be very important to have accurate information. But I do not think that we can achieve that before the bombing stops.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords—

Lord Clark of Kempston

My Lords, in view of the fact that implementation of a withholding tax will cost many thousands of jobs in this country, was there a specific mention of that, rather than the matter being included in the generalisation about so-called tax harmonisation?

Baroness Jay of Paddington

My Lords, I am sorry, I may have slightly misheard the noble Lord. There is no agreement on a withholding tax being imposed on Britain by Brussels, and there will certainly be no agreement to anything that damages the eurobond market. As I said in reply to the noble Viscount, there was specific mention in the Council's resolutions that it was happy that the agreements that were made would take into account the need to remain competitive in those bond markets.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, I think that there are—

The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Williams of Mostyn)

My Lords, the 20 minutes' mandatory time, as stated in the Companion, has now elapsed. There is other business and we ought to stick to the convention.