G8 Summit: Sea Island, Georgia (Hansard, 13 May 2004)

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, the G8 Summit agenda is still under discussion but we expect that it will cover international support for regionally-led development in the Middle East on education and knowledge; democracy building and economic development; a support package of measures to help developing countries to grow economically; further measures to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and polio; security issues, particularly in relation to transport, non-proliferation and counter-terrorism, and measures tackling corruption.

§ Lord Wallace of Saltaire
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Does she recognise that many of us who followed what were originally G7 Summits have grown increasingly sceptical about their value as they have become more and more of a media circus and less of a substantive discussion? Can she confirm that there will not be discussion on the issues that these summits were originally set up to discuss, that is, global, economic and financial balances in which the participation of China would be rather important given the vast gap between the Chinese trade surplus and the American deficit? Can she tell the House whether we can still expect a US proposal for a greater Middle East initiative and how actively Her Majesty's Government are discussing with their European partners what a European response to any sort of initiative on the Middle East is likely to be?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I do not agree with the first part of the noble Lord's question. It implied somehow that this was a fairly pointless exercise and had rather missed its target in not having a sufficiently robust economic component. The first two points which I drew to your Lordships' 385 attention do have robust economic components. There are real economic problems in the countries of the Middle East. The economies are growing more slowly than anywhere else in the world. They have a growing population of young people. Fifty per cent of the people in those countries are under the age of 18. There are growing problems of youth unemployment. So this is enormously important in relation to the Middle East.
The noble Lord will know—I have answered before—of the rather different nuances that are placed on the question of a greater Middle East proposal, but it is under discussion. I was at a Euro-Med meeting last week and discussed this with colleagues from the region as well as with colleagues in Europe. I shall also have the honour to represent the United Kingdom at three forthcoming international conferences involving our Arab colleagues within the next six days.

§ Lord Hannay of Chiswick
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that it is high time we seriously considered expanding the G8 format to include as equal partners a number of the leading developing countries? The noble Lord, Lord Wallace, mentioned China but there are also India, Brazil and South Africa to consider. Does she not also agree that as the G8 Summits are, by definition, not decision-making bodies, the normal argument against expansion—that this makes taking decisions more difficult—does not apply?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, yes. I have a great deal of sympathy with the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, on this matter. That is why in the past there have been invitations to others outside the immediate ambit of the G8 to attend G8 Summits as observers or observer/participants. I believe that invitations will be sent out on this occasion. Some may already have been sent. I do not want to prejudice the position by suggesting to whom they may he sent because I am not sure whether they have been sent.
All these matters are still under discussion. We must remember that Foreign Ministers are meeting tomorrow in Washington to discuss the agenda, what it will involve and who might be invited. The Sherpas still have work in progress and the Finance Ministers meet on the 22 and 23 of this month.

§ Lord Howell of Guildford
My Lords, the main agenda item on this summit almost certainly will be Middle East reform. Does the Minister agree, first, that this will be a good opportunity to remind world leaders that in Iraq—that is the main problem area along with Israel/Palestine, of course—despite all the horrific prisoner abuses and some of the rather wild and idiotic talk about the coalition effort being doomed or in a nosedive, the security situation is now showing signs of coming under better control as most decent Iraqis unite against extreme violence and barbarism of the kind we read about, to our horror, yesterday? Secondly, is it not also the right time for the Prime Minister, who will obviously attend the G8 386 Summit, to be a little bolder in telling our American allies that they cannot handle the situation alone and that in future the coalition forces must shed their image as an occupying power and work to some kind of clear Iraqi sovereignty?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I hope that the agenda will not be dominated solely by Iraq and the Israel/Palestinian issue, although I think that we all freely concede that at virtually any international meeting at present that involves our friends from the Middle East region that is bound to be an important item on the agenda. However, I hope that there will be a broader perspective taken about these issues in the Middle East and about the developments in the way that my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary made clear in the remarkable speech he made on 1 March.
There are a great number of good signs of reform being generated in the Middle East. Egypt, for example, has just set up a national council for human rights; Oman held its first elections on universal suffrage last year; and the Saudis have announced an intention to hold municipal elections. We hear very little about all of those matters in the very gloomy picture that is put forward. However, I assure the noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister is very bold in the way that he states his case. He does not lose an opportunity to do so. He very sensibly does not go in for megaphone politics, which, as the noble Lord will be aware, rarely delivers what it should. I point out, for example, that yesterday my right honourable friend made clear that we would be happy to have a permanent ICRC presence in our sector in Iraq.