§ Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe)I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this issue, which I do partly in my capacity as chair of the all-party Cuba group. In the press and in the general political context, Cuba is associated with a left-wing position, so it is surprising to some that Opposition Members join the group. I am happy to say that there is broad support for the group, which includes many Conservative and Liberal Democrat Members. I acknowledge the parallel work done in the business community by the Cuba initiative, which is chaired by the noble Lord Moynihan, who sits on the Conservative Benches. What members of the group have in common is not a political view of Cuba but a view that that country deserves fair treatment that is comparable with that of other countries at a similar stage of development that have similar advantages and drawbacks.
Like so many areas in world politics, Cuba presents a difficult challenge to most of us, as it does not fit neatly into any category. Most members of the all-party group recognise that Cuba's Government, under pressure from decades of blockade and hostility from exiles, has a number of policies that no one who supports full freedom of opinion can welcome. We recognise that progress needs to be made, and the only issue that people debate is how that progress can be achieved without provoking a general destabilisation of the country that would be against the interests of the people of Cuba.
Given its limited resources, Cuba's social record is startling; its education is excellent, and life expectancy in the country is almost at UK levels, despite a health service that can afford only a fraction of our expenditure. It is perhaps fortunate that no Conservative Member is present when I say that we can learn from Cuba, as well as Cuba learning from us, about how it is possible to achieve progress in public health with relatively limited resources. I am indebted to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Dr. Stoate), a member of the Select Committee on Health, who has been to Cuba more than once and especially commends its work in primary health care.
§ Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)Will my hon. Friend give way?
§ Mr. Bill O'Brien (in the Chair)Order. Has the hon. Gentleman asked for permission from the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer) to intervene in the debate?
§ Dr. PalmerYes: I should have informed the Chair that I had agreed.
§ Jeremy CorbynI thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and I apologise for not informing the Chair of this in advance.
I have been to Cuba twice, and I was very impressed by its health service. Does my hon. Friend agree that the success of its health service is due not only to the skill of the doctors, surgeons and other health technicians, but to a popular understanding of the need for preventative 319WH medicine and of the role that doctors play in society? That is a complete role that involves encouraging health education and healthy living and eating, which is demonstrated by Cuba's excellent statistics, despite having far fewer resources to throw at health care than the United States or this country.
§ Dr. PalmerMy hon. Friend is right. On that matter, I defer to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford, who is more of an expert on the subject: he agrees with my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) that the key issue is the focus on popular involvement in healthy living. As someone who hates sport, I regret to say that that includes a national commitment to sport. That is reflected in Cuba's national health statistics in a way that gives us pause for thought.
Even for those of us who are new Labour to our toenails, it is good for the world that there is one country that is still trying to show that an alternative economic model can work: a little political world competition is never a bad thing. However, there are sustained efforts against the Cuban Government by exile groups that are hostile to them, and there are advisers on the fringes of the United States Government who would like to label Cuba as part of an axis of evil. The agenda of those groups is hostile to the existence of the Cuban Government in their current form—or anything similar. They seek to lead the US Administration and its allies in a direction that very few people on both sides of the Atlantic wish to go.
The peculiar treatment of the "Miami five" Cuban agents also highlights the very strong influence of those exile groups. I appreciate that the Minister has no responsibility for the Miami five trial, but it is worth noting that their attempt to be tried outside the heated atmosphere of Miami was refused, despite the fact that the State Department sought to have a different trial affecting its own employees moved because of anti-Cuban-Government feeling in Miami. Therefore, there are clear inconsistencies. Also, Amnesty International is concerned about the fact that the accused are being held in solitary confinement as they attempt to prepare for their appeal.
Those groups would like Cuba's Government to be removed by pressure, and even by force. It is important that we make it clear that that is not British policy and that our first choice is constructive engagement. The key issue is what form that should take.
That brings us to the question of the Cotonou agreement. The successor to the African, Caribbean and Pacific agreement, the Cotonou agreement contains commitments to human rights, and I think that we all feel that they are an important advance on the ACP agreement. We are saying, "We want free trade but we want it under conditions that we can defend with partners we fully respect." It has been argued that no country that is not already in full compliance should be admitted. However, it is worth noting that there are countries that are partners in the Cotonou agreement that might not be said fully to fulfil the requirements. Nigeria's applications of Sharia law make it possible in principle for women to be stoned to death for alleged moral offences. Zimbabwe's leader reportedly describes himself as the new Hitler, and his behaviour makes Cuba's Government as uncontroversial by comparison as Cossall parish council in my home village.
320WH It is worth noting that, contrary to what one might expect, the application has universal support from other ACP countries. They do not see Cuba as a potential competitor, because it has voluntarily agreed not to seek trading advantages at the expense of the other partners. If Cuba were to be the only country in the ACP area to be excluded from Cotonou, that would be a clear act of political selectivity. By contrast, its admittance would commit Cuba to the words of the agreement:
the promotion of human rights, processes of democratisation, consolidation of the rule of law and good governance",and it would provide the European Union with an important measure of leverage on all those issues. As a strong supporter of our action in Iraq, once it had become clear that there was no other way in which to stop a fascist dictator with biochemical weapons—4.20 pm
Sitting suspended for Divisions in the House.
4.46 pm
On resuming—
§ Dr. PalmerAs a strong supporter of our action in Iraq—because, in my view, it has become clear that there is no other way to stop a fascist dictator who has biochemical weapons—I believe that it is all the more important that we show that we are open to voluntary and co-operative progress on human rights by Governments with whom we have, by comparison, far less serious disagreements. The Cotonou application is supported by the relevant EU Commissioner and by most European Union countries, and I very much hope that we will not use our effective veto to block it. We believe in constructive engagement, and Cotonou is all about that. I hope that it will present the way forward for Cuba.
Mr.BenChapman (Wirral, South)First, may I apologise for the fact that I must leave before the end of the debate, owing to a previous commitment? Also, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer) on securing this important debate.
As I see it, Cuba is in a state of stalled transition. The economic crisis of the 1990s forced the regime to implement liberalising reforms, but subsequent signs of recovery have been met with counter-reform and ideological reassertion. The country remains poised for further policy change, which could lift the economy out of its slump, but the current political situation prevents that from occurring. That said, the dynamics of Cuba's transition may be unclear, but we can be sure that the process of reform is ultimately inevitable.
I hope that he forgives me for saying so, but notwithstanding his many achievements, the erstwhile revolutionary leader of Cuba is, in some sense, a relic of the cold war. Over the past 42 years, there have been many incautious predictions of his demise, beginning with the ill-fated and ill-conceived attack at the Bay of Pigs. However, it is not such bellicose actions that have been shown to effect change in Cuba, nor has it been isolation and embargo, which simply entrench the regime's position. Rather, it is engagement. We have seen that process throughout the 1990s and 321WH subsequently. Although the regime has limited the progress of reform, it cannot be stopped altogether, not least because that would cripple the economy. Small economic successes in the past decade have tended to be closely followed by ideological crackdowns, but the seed of reform has been planted and it will grow.
In view of that process, further engagement of Cuba by the UK, the EU, and indeed the US, is advisable and a matter of self-interest. I welcome the gaps that I see emerging in Washington's economic blockade of Cuba, but as the US begins to reverse its failed policy, the UK should not be left behind. As my hon. Friend mentioned, Cuba is not a signatory of the Cotonou agreement. I encourage it to become so. The UK has no bilateral aid programme with Cuba, nor plans to develop one, which is a shame. To some extent, that is a product of the aid-to-the-poorest policy, which means that a country that has helped itself above a certain median level cannot qualify as one of the poorest. Ultimately, therefore, we continue to put aid into areas that are perhaps unchangeably poor, rather than helping countries that can improve incrementally, such as Cuba.
Department for International Development assistance to Cuba via non-governmental organisations totalled a mere £346,000 in 2001–02. We also provided £1 million towards the EU aid programme for Cuba, but that is not much in the scheme of things. I recognise that we have significant trade links, and tourism develops apace. Also, I very much welcome and applaud the Cuba initiative that my hon. Friend mentioned, but our bilateral relationship is insufficient.
Aside from the €15 million in aid and a Havana office that deals almost exclusively with trade matters, the EU is more or less inactive in Cuba. It is the only country with which the EU has no formal agreement on economic co-operation, yet in terms of trade and tourism, the EU and Cuba are closely linked. The euro is legal tender in many Cuban resorts, and the EU accounts for 40 per cent. of Cuba's trade. The de jure institutional linkages should be allowed to match the de facto situation. They do not match, of course, because of the nature of Cuba's political system and its human rights record, but history has taught us that washing our hands of a problem and isolating a regime reap little reward. Those circumstances continue to isolate not only the regime but the Cuban people. We will garner little favour with reformers on the island if we simply let them hang.
Of course, 11 September impacted on Cuba's economy through oil prices and declining tourist revenues, and Hurricane Michelle exacerbated that. The economy has barely been off its knees since 1990, and there are still severe shortages of many essential goods such as food and medicine. We must act now to build linkages to bring Cuba into the international community, jump-starting the stalled process of transition. Cuba must be engaged, riot isolated, and the ways of achieving that immediately are bilateral dialogue and aid or accession to the Cotonou agreement.
The creeping juggernaut of reform is on the verge of changing the Cuban regime. We can say for certain only that regime change will occur at some point, but it is my 322WH contention that we should be there positively when it does. Such engagement would allow us to steer the transition process to the betterment of the Cuban people, the Cuban economy and our bilateral relations.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Mike O'Brien)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Dr. Palmer) on having won the ballot and secured the debate. This is an important issue, and it is right that we should debate it.
The United Kingdom enjoys cordial diplomatic relations with Cuba. However, along with our European Union partners, we cannot have entirely normal relations with Cuba because of the nature of the Castro regime, and especially the violations of human rights that it commits.
Managing relations with Cuba is a complex business, and I shall describe how we do it through the EU and other multilateral forums, and bilaterally. We want Cuba to develop economically, politically and socially, and to build on the significant advances that its Government have already made in health and literacy, which have been mentioned. Cuba has the natural and human resources .to become one of the region's most prosperous economies, but its political and economic system needs to develop for that to happen. The EU, the United States and the UK share the same goal for Cuba: a peaceful transition to a pluralist democracy. However, we seek to achieve that through constructive engagement, rather than through isolating Cuba.
I admit that there are times when constructive engagement can be somewhat difficult. The EU has been proposing a political dialogue with Cuba for years, yet the on-off process remains frustratingly barren. Cuba will talk, but only on Cuba's terms. The human rights situation in Cuba remains a major cause for concern, and the arrest of 80 people last month in a crackdown on dissident activity is a further setback for all, including the Government, whose aim is the progressive normalisation of relations between the EU and Cuba.
Since 1996, EU relations with Cuba have been governed by a common position that sets out the EU desire to be Cuba's partner through constructive dialogue and co-operation. However, at the same time that position affirms that the intensification of those relations depends on Cuba's making progress on human rights. The common position makes it clear that full cooperation will not be possible until Cuba commits itself to international human rights standards. The EU calls for freedom of assembly and expression, a free media and freedom for all political parties. We urge an end to arbitrary detention, intimidation and imprisonment on political grounds. The common position has proved a useful means of managing EU relations with Cuba, and it has been maintained unanimously in 12 consecutive evaluations.
The EU also deals with relations with Cuba in two United Nations forums: the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly. The EU has cosponsored a resolution on Cuba at the UN Commission on Human Rights for the past 10 years. The resolution voices—in modest terms—international concern at the systematic denial of fundamental civil and political 323WH rights to the people of Cuba. It also focuses the frustrations felt at Cuba's lack of co-operation with UN human rights mechanisms and its refusal to acknowledge any domestic human rights problems. This year as last, Latin American countries tabled the resolution. We welcome the involvement of countries within Cuba's home region.
The EU acts in concert in the General Assembly and each year votes against a US embargo. The EU also rejects the US attempts to pursue its Cuba policy through the extension of its legal jurisdiction beyond US borders by means of the Helms-Burton Act.
My hon. Friend referred to the Miami five. The Government believe that that is a bilateral matter between the US and Cuba, and that any questions about the sentencing and treatment of those prisoners should be addressed to the appropriate US authorities. As my hon. Friend understands, the Government have no formal standing to intervene in the United States domestic judicial processes with people who are not UK nationals.
In January, Cuba applied to join the Cotonou agreement, which is an agreement between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific countries that can bring benefits to those countries in trade and development. Cuba wants Cotonou, and the EU sees Cuba as a natural signatory, but we must see some improvements in human rights first. Unconditional entry to Cotonou would reward Cuba's intransigence on human rights. We cannot have that. Cuba's application is yet to be discussed formally in the EU. However, the chances of its being accepted must have receded significantly in recent weeks, following the arrests. Cotonou can and will benefit Cuba, but Cuba must show itself ready to take on the human rights obligations that Cotonou imposes. To date, it has not demonstrated its willingness to do so. Arresting a further 80 dissidents last month seems almost to have been calculated to prevent the EU from assessing Cuba's application positively.
Some argue that Cotonou will give us further opportunities to engage Cuba. I understand that. Let us work with Cuba through the agreement and we can all benefit. Other countries, arguably with worse human rights records, are in the Cotonou agreement, so people say, "Why bar Cuba?" That would be a fair point if we could cite just one example when the Cuban regime has responded positively to the EU or international diplomacy in that way. Sadly, however, the history of Cuba's relations with the international community does not support such moves. We cannot approach Cotonou, the common position or the UN Commission on Human Rights as if there were no such history. We must seek at least some positive demonstration from Cuba of a willingness to change, as demanded in the EU's common position.
Having said that, I do not wish to portray UK-Cuba relations as bleak—far from it. The Government strive to maintain a framework for the development of UK-Cuba relations in conformity with the common position. An active UK-Cuba agenda is pursued by ambassadors in Havana and London, by other 324WH Departments and by the voluntary and private sectors. The Cuba initiative is a UK-Cuba body, dedicated to reinforcing non-governmental links, especially on trade, investment and culture. Lord Moynihan was appointed the British chairman in December, and I welcome the energy that he is bringing to the task.
Direct UK trade and investment in Cuba is modest, at some £20 million a year. Cuba offers British companies both commercial and strategic investment opportunities. We continue, through the EU, to encourage the Government of Cuba to make the country's trade and investment climate more favourable for European investors. Various Departments are promoting links with Cuba. Our law enforcement collaboration with Cuba, for example, is viewed positively by both sides. UK drugs liaison officers have established effective working relations with the Cubans on operational and policy matters.
Through the British Council, we collaborate with Cuba on science, medicine and biotechnology—areas in which Cuba has considerable expertise. We need to build on that. Promoting successful UK scientific endeavour helps us to communicate a modern image of the UK, and it shows that we regard Cuba as a modern country that is seeking to deal with some of the challenges that we all face.
Unfortunately, stronger and closer development of our links is damaged in the area of human rights. We are scoping a pilot project in the Democratic Republic of Congo to explore how Cuban doctors might be engaged in the fight against AIDS. The embassy and the British Council sponsored a Cuban-British bio-informatics seminar in Havana in November 2002 and an international distance learning workshop in February 2003. A Cuban biotechnology mission to Glasgow is planned for mid-2003.
There is a growing number of sporting exchanges between the UK and Cuba. Sir Rodney Walker, the president of the UK Sports Council, will visit Cuba this month to sign a sporting memorandum of understanding. In 2002, our embassy in Havana mounted a programme of events celebrating the relationship and presenting Britain's cultural heritage, creativity and diversity. Many opportunities have presented themselves.
We just wish that Cuba would open its doors and be more sensible in respect of international human rights standards. If it did that, the prospects for building closer relationships with the European Union could be good. We want those relationships to become closer. We want Cuba to be brought into the wider family of nations. We want it to recognise that its people have the right to speak out against Castro, if they wish. No leader has the right to be beyond criticism. If Cuba showed that it was willing to make some changes in its out-of-date attitudes on human rights—attitudes which, as my hon. Friend has said, belong more to the cold war and to eras gone by than to any country that hopes to be recognised as a modern member of the international community—the opportunities for Cuba with the European Union would be enormous.
325WH We hope that, through continued constructive engagement and modest thickening of bilateral relationships, the Government can convince the Cuban Government that Britain is serious about wanting improved relationships and a genuine dialogue. We 326WH want closer relationships. We hope that Cuba will provide the opportunity through its reform of human rights to give us the opening that we need to create stronger and better relationships.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at five minutes past Five o'clock.