Falkland Islands (Hansard, 25 April 1985)

§ Mr. Renton

Yes. The text is as follows:

"I enjoyed your thoughtful contribution to the adjournment debate on 14 March on the Falkland Islands and Argentina, though I must reject your charges of "intransigence": as I said in winding up, it is we who have made the running in seeking more normal bilateral relations with Argentina. Unfortunately shortage of time prevented me from dealing with other points you made. You have since gone over some of the ground when you called on our Falkland Islands Department, to prepare for your meeting with Argentine Parliamentarians at the seminar in Bonn on 27 March on the European Community and Argentina; Andrew Palmer tells me that you would welcome written comments from me on some of the points in your speech.

You urge us to take due account of the democratic nature of the present Argentine Government and their opposition to the Junta. We certainly regard President Alfonsin's criticism of the 508W invasion at the time as a courageous act. But he complained of the means employed, and not of the cause the Junta were pursuing; his commitment to Argentina's claim to the Falklands is as inflexible as anyone's.

You will know that the Prime Minister publicly welcomed the restoration of democracy in Argentina in December 1983. She sent President Alfonsin a personal message on the occasion of his inauguration, and we have taken a number of initiatives since to achieve more normal relations. The obstacle to progress continues to be Argentine intransigence. It was their departure from a carefully agreed formula that resulted in the deadlock at the Berne talks in July 1984. Only last week President Alfonsin reiterated, on this occasion to a joint meeting of the United States Congress in Washington, that Argentina insisted that any discusion of normalisation was only possible if sovereignty were also to be discussed (I attach the text of his remarks).

You mentioned a possible role for the Secretary General of the United Nations. During the conflict, the Secretary General played an important part in attempts to secure the withdrawal of Argentine forces from the Falkland Islands. But since hostilities ceased we have taken the view that it is better for the Argentines and ourselves to conduct our exchanges through the Swiss and Brazilian Protecting Powers, without any intermediary. In his report to the United Nations General Assembly last year, Sr Perez de Cuellar expressed the hope that there could be a dialogue coupled with the adoption of confidence-building measures. The Government's policy, to seek to improve bilateral relations with Argentina through agreement on practical measures of benefit to both sides, is fully consistent with Sr Perez de Cuellar's sensible and pragmatic approach. As Geoffrey Howe said in the House on 14 March, reciprocal lifting of commercial and financial restrictions could be a natural starting point, and we have reiterated our readiness to accept a properly supervised visit to the Islands by relatives of Argentine servicemen buried there.

You made in your speech a comparison in general terms between the Government's handling of the future of Hong Kong and of the Falklands. There is a major difference between the two cases. The lease from China of 92 per cent. of the area of Hong Kong is due to expire on 1997. In these circumstances, we believe the arrangements we have made to be the best possible to maintain Hong Kong's stability and prosperity, enabling its people to plan peacefully and confidently for the future. But no such deadline governs the future of the Falkland Islands, and the 1982 invasion makes it impossible for us to discuss sovereignty with the Argentines. We do not, therefore, consider there to be a parallel between the two cases.

You discussed the cost of defending the Falklands. I covered your main point in my concluding remarks—column 582. You courteously deferred to Tam Dalyell on the per capita cost of defending the Islands. In fact your figure was accurate, and he was wrong. But in either case, as I said in the debate, the level of expenditure should come down sharply once the airport at Mount Pleasant has been completed. Total government expenditure in connection with the Falkland Islands from 2 April 1982 until the end of the current financial year is forecast at approximately £2,113 million, which breaks down as follows:

	£ million
Operation Corporate (Falklands Campaign)	780
MOD PES Supplements
1983–84	^*624
1984–85	^*684
FCO (ODA) assistance (rehabilitation and development projects)	25
Total	2,113
^* garrison capital and running costs, plus campaign costs.

You will see that the overwhelming proportion of this is the cost of recovering the Islands, replacement costs, and the construction of Mount Pleasant Airport."