House of Commons Hansard Debates for 22 May 1991

Hansard

House of Commons

Wednesday 22 May 1991

The House met at half-past Two o'clock

PRAYERS

[ Mr. Speaker-- in the Chair ]

PRIVATE BUSINESS

London Underground Bill

Order for consideration, as amended, read.

To be considered on Thursday 6 June.

Killingholme Generating Stations (Ancillary Powers) Bill

[Lords] (By Order)

Order for Third Reading read.

To be read the Third time on Thursday 6 June.

East Coast Main Line (Safety) Bill

(By Order) Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [13 May], That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Debate further adjourned till Thursday 6 June.

Mr. Speaker : As the next three Bills have blocking motions, I shall put them together.

London Regional Transport (Penalty Fares) Bill

(By Order)

London Underground (King's Cross) Bill

(By Order)

British Railways (No. 3) Bill

[Lords] (By Order) Orders for Second Reading read.

To be read a Second time on Thursday 6 June.

Highland Regional Council (Harbours) Order Confirmation Bill

Read the Third time, and passed.

Column 912

Mr. Rajiv Gandhi

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Douglas Hurd) : With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say afew words about the death of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. It would be wrong to begin Foreign and Commonwealth questions without doing so. I know that the House will join me in condemning the assassination. It is a fearful tragedy. No one who knew Rajiv Gandhi could doubt that it was devotion to India that brought him into political life in the first place and led him to the top. The loss for India and for his friends is beyond calculation, and I am sure that the House will wish to join us in sending our deep sympathy to his family and to the people of India. We are confident that India, as a great democracy, will surmount even this disaster.

Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) : With permission, Mr. Speaker, may I say first how absolutely right the Foreign Secretary was to start our proceedings this afternoon as he did. We echo entirely what he said, and he spoke for the whole House. We--my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and I--have had our own acquaintance with Rajiv as well as with his mother. I last saw Rajiv at the Namibian independence celebrations in Windhoek last year, when the Foreign Secretary was there.

We have a particular and long-standing relationship with the Indian people, which stems from the independence of India, which was brought about under one of our Governments. Since that time, both sides of the House have admired the strength of Indian democracy and have admired that family for its contribution to Indian democracy. It is tragic that such an event should have taken place during an election, one in which Rajiv might again have become the Prime Minister of his country.

The Foreign Secretary is right to say that Indian democracy is strong enough to withstand even this event. It is a great democracy which we admire enormously and which will persevere and survive. In sending our sympathy to Rajiv's family and to the Indian people, let us not forget the Indian community in this country who will share the grief of their compatriots in India. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman.

Sir Russell Johnston (Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber) : With permission, Mr. Speaker, I wish to associate all the Liberal Democrats with everything that the Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) said. The sheer wickedness of putting a bomb in a basket of flowers to kill a democratic politician leaves one emotionally empty. The hugely important thing that Rajiv Gandhi sought to do was to bring to India reconciliation between different groups and different religions. That aim will continue after his death and we salute him for that high objective. We grieve with his wife, his family and his people. This is a terribly sad moment.

Mr. Speaker : I am sure that the whole House will wish to be associated with what the Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) and the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Sir R. Johnston) said.

Column 913

Oral Answers to Questions

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

European Economic Unity

1. Mrs. Currie : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on further progress in the intergovernmental conference in the European Community on economic unity.

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Douglas Hurd) : The United Kingdom continues to play a positive partin the European monetary union intergovernmental conference. The most recent discussions were in ECOFIN--the Economic and Finance Council--on 11 May 1991, attended by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Mrs. Currie : Bearing in mind the huge changes that the negotiations and discussions would mean for the United Kingdom and the fact that, according to opinion polls, two thirds of the British people think that we will be at stage 3 with a single currency by the year 2000 and more than half of them think that that is a good thing, does my right hon. Friend accept that the correct role of United Kingdom Ministers is to defend United Kingdom interests in all the negotiations, but as a part of, and at the heart of, a Europe that continues to be strong, democratic and free?

Mr. Hurd : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The negotiations at both conferences--the one in which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer takes part and the one in which I take part--have their occasional difficulties, as my hon. Friend knows, but they are being held in a good atmosphere and if everyone acts in the spirit that my hon. Friend suggested, the prospects will be good.

Sir Russell Johnston : Does the Foreign Secretary think that the good atmosphere to which he referred has been improved by the early-day motion on the Order Paper?

Mr. Hurd : I thought that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister dealt very adeptly with that matter yesterday. I have nothing to add to the comments that he made.

Sir Anthony Meyer : Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great confidence among Conservative Members in his ability to stand up for British interests in the negotiations and that there is no general willingness to tie his hands by imposing conditions on which concessions he may wish to offer to secure still more vital British objectives?

Mr. Hurd : The stance that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor and I are taking in the two sets of discussions has been fully discussed in the House and in the country. I hope that, as my hon. Friend says, it commands general consent.

Mr. Kaufman : The right hon. Gentleman must not be quite so coy about the early-day motion and he must come clean on where he stands on it. Is the Government's policy the one that we know that the right hon. Gentleman

Column 914

favours, signing up for EMU and the single currency ; or is it the policy of Sir Leon Brittan, which would side-track us on a double-track approach ; or is it the policy of the early-day motion, which everyone knows that Downing street has stirred up and is the Prime Minister's position? Which of the three policies-- [Interruption.] It is the tendency of Conservative Members to heckle on all their splits so they now heckle a lot. Which of the three is the Government's policy, or are they dithering among the three?

Mr. Hurd : In following the right hon. Gentleman over many years, I have noticed that when he says that a certain thing is something that everybody knows, it is usually open to question, and that is exactly the position with his remarks today. The early-day motion to which he has again drawn attention refers to a text which the Luxembourg presidency put forward in an attempt to reach a compromise. There are various points in the text and some, although not all, are set out in the early-day motion and will need substantial change if they are to have our support.

Caribbean (Drugs Trade)

2. Mr. Hayes : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what international measures are being taken to tackle the drugs trade in the Caribbean.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Mark Lennox-Boyd) : The drugs trade poses serious threat to the Caribbean. We are actively helping regional and international efforts aimed at interdicting drug smuggling, pursuing drug traffickers and confiscating their assets.

Mr. Hayes : Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government pay great attention, applying considerable detail, to drug trafficking in the dependent territories and that they are taking a series of measures in co- operation with independent countries in the Caribbean which is to be welcomed?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that matter. Much of the United Kingdom's drug-related assistance goes to the region, especially to the dependent territories. That assistance amounted to more than £4 million last year. We are in contact with the independent countries and encourage them to enact suitable legislation and sign agreements with us. Recently, I signed an agreement with Barbados on confiscation of drug-related assets.

Rev. Martin Smyth : Although I welcome the position on the Caribbean, the Minister will be aware that some people there forecast that the movement will spread to Europe. Is he satisfied that drug smuggling into Europe will be met with the same international co-operation to destroy trafficking and protect our people?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Yes, it is particularly because of the movement of drugs from the Caribbean to Europe that we take such an interest. Naturally, we are also concerned for the interests of that region, but there is a community of interest between us because the drugs ultimately come here.

Column 915

Mr. Jacques Arnold : When considering international measures, will my hon. Friend bear in mind the potential of the banking operations on many of the Caribbean islands to launder money on behalf of the drugs trade?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Yes, we are conscious of the need for arrangements to counter money laundering. Part of our activities is to advise on how to counter money laundering in that region.

European Council

3. Mr. Buckley : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is on the agenda of the European Council of 28 and 29 June ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Hurd : I expect discussion to cover the two intergovernmental conferences, progress in the single market programme and major international issues. The Luxembourg presidency has not yet announced the formal agenda.

Mr. Buckley : Will the Heads of Government discuss why the United Kingdom is the only country in the European Community ever to have the Commissioner block regional development grant due to the misappropriation-- if that is the proper word--of the Treasury in terms of the European Parliament? Will the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary raise the matter of fines that the United Kingdom Government wish to impose on European Governments for not carrying out Community law for the Treasury in that matter?

Mr. Hurd : I am not sure that I follow the hon. Gentleman's question. If he wishes to write to me, the Treasury or the Department of Trade and Industry about his complaint, I shall look into it. On the hon. Gentleman's second point, one of our proposals to the intergovernmental conference is that countries that persistently refuse to carry out their obligations within the Community should suffer in the form of fines.

Mr. Cash : Does my right hon. Friend accept that a statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister yesterday, on the early-day motion that has been mentioned today, has gone down extremely well with a very high proportion of Conservative Members? I take this opportunity to congratulate my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and other Ministers on their efforts to ensure that the British line stands firm on those vital matters. I totally repudiate the remarks by the shadow Foreign Secretary suggesting that the motion was inspired at No. 10 Downing street. It came from the Conservative Back Benches.

Mr. Hurd : I am delighted that my hon. Friend is delighted. I gracefully accept his congratulations.

Mr. Radice : Were the right hon. Gentleman a Back Bencher, would he have signed that early-day motion?

Mr. Hurd : I would have had a long talk with my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash) first.

Mr. Budgen : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is the role of political leadership to explain to the country and to the House the issues of principle and detail? Is not

Column 916

there a grave danger that the House and the country will be left without leadership on the vital issue of economic and monetary union?

Mr. Hurd : I know of few political subjects that have been so thoroughly discussed and debated in the past months as that one was. Of course, my hon. Friend is right there will need to be a constant process of debate and coming and going. As I understand it, the House will have an opportunity between now and the summit to go over those issues again.

Single Market

4. Mr. Cryer : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the most recent meeting with other Foreign Ministers from other EC member states on progress towards establishment of the single market.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Tristan Garel-Jones) : Single market questions were not discussed at the Foreign Affairs Council meeting on 13 and 14 May. Single market business is normally conducted at the Internal Market Council, where Department of Trade and Industry Ministers represent the United Kingdom. The Internal Market Council next meets on 18 June.

Mr. Cryer : Will the Minister insist that the United Kingdom has the right to ban the importation of dangerous dogs, illegal drugs and illegal arms at the frontiers of this country, irrespective of the single market? If those overpaid, arrogant, appointed Commissioners try to interfere, will he muzzle them or will he be the lapdog of the Common Market, as the Government have been for the past 12 years when they have capitulated to every demand made by the Common Market?

Mr. Garel-Jones : The hon. Gentleman was once an overpaid Member of the European Parliament and I dare say that, given the marginality of his seat, he may soon be looking for another European seat. The United Kingdom does not share the Commission's views on the abolition of border controls. Frontier checks will continue to be necessary to prevent illegal immigration, terrorism, drug trafficking and serious crimes, as well as the other matters to which the hon. Gentleman referred.

Mr. Favell : Will my hon. Friend confirm that the intergovernmental conference which is under way is about something completely different from the single market? The draft treaty from the Luxembourg presidency is about who controls economic, foreign and immigration policies and much else. Does it strike my hon. Friend as extraordinary that the newly pin-striped socialist nellies have no policy on that whatsoever?

Mr. Garel-Jones : My hon. Friend is right to say that intergovernmental conferences range over wide issues. They discuss the future of the European Community and European union and, as my hon. Friend said, the Government are at the centre of that debate. We intend to ensure that the next steps that the Community and the European union take will have the fingerprints of Britain all over them and that our influence is well brought to bear. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that the

Column 917

Labour party has spent a generation campaigning for withdrawal from the Community and now does not exactly know which way to move. One part of the party is manned by Europhobes, another part by Europhiles and it is led by Europhoneys.

Mr. Robertson : Mr. Speaker-- [Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker : Order. There seems to be a bit of a holiday atmosphere --will hon. Members please settle down.

Mr. Robertson : I was tempted to ask whether, if the Minister had still been the deputy Chief Whip, there would have been any early-day motion for us to discuss. Instead, I shall point out the dramatic contrast between the words of the Secretary of State for Employment which appeared in the Financial Times last Monday, which suggested that the British Government's stance on the social charter had softened, and the hard-line approach taken on the same day in the Foreign Affairs Council by the Foreign Secretary, who said that the British Government opposed the social charter. If majority voting on social affairs is proposed, will the British Government use their veto at the intergovernmental conference?

Mr. Garel-Jones : I am able to give a simple answer on both the hon. Gentleman's points. I shall deal first with the social action programme within the Community and the general action taken by the Community on social issues. The hon. Gentleman will know--I wish that he would also make it known to his hon. Friends--that the United Kingdom is the only member state so far to have implemented all 18 of the directives due for implementation. We have an excellent record on social issues, for which I make no apologies.

Secondly, the Government and their predecessors during the past 12 or 14 years have invested a considerable amount of effort, with the support of the British people, in shaping the way in which we think that industrial relations should be conducted in this country. The result of that policy during the past decade has meant that we now enjoy the best industrial relations that we have enjoyed for many years, which has enabled our nation's economy to prosper in a way that it has not done before. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government do not intend those achievements to be reversed by an extension of qualified majority voting within the Community.

Mr. Marlow : Whatever the merits of the issue, did we give the European institutions, within the single market, the right to decide about tobacco advertising? I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that it is one thing for the House to surrender powers to the European Community but that those powers should not be acquired by stealth.

Mr. Garel-Jones : I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that Britain's support for the single market and Britain's decision to achieve it by qualified majority voting was a wise decision and that the implementation of the single market is the driving force behind the Community. As regards the proposed directive on tobacco advertising, it is only a proposal. It raises a substantial number of difficulties, not merely for Britain but for many other member states.

Column 918

Mr. Cryer : On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the inadequate answer from the Minister, who is a servile Euro-fanatic, I ask leave to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

Mr. Speaker : Order. Let me clear up this matter. It is certainly legitimate to ask to raise matters on the Adjournment, but not by making a speech and giving a foretaste of what the hon. Gentleman may say if he gets that Adjournment debate.

Sri Lanka

5. Mr. Battle : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the situation in Sri Lanka.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : We support the Sri Lankan Government in their efforts to overcome the terrorist challenge that they face, but at the same time we have made very clear our concerns that all parties must fully respect human rights.

Mr. Battle : In pressing the Sri Lankan Government to pursue a political solution to the conflict between the Sinhala and the Tamils, can the Minister assure me that our Government will support the Australian initiative for mediation by the Commonwealth?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : We have always made it clear that if there is any helpful part that we can play through mediation at the request of the Sri Lankan Government, we shall do so.

Mr. Michael Morris : Has my hon. Friend seen the same reports that I have received on the local elections in Sri Lanka, saying that they were free and fair and that Tamils stood and were elected? Is it significant now that, in response to the tragedy in India, the voice of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was heard from that organisation's European headquarters in London? Is not it time that the Foreign Office and the Home Office got together to deal with those people who are essentially here on bogus visas?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : I can confirm that it is our judgment that the elections were free and fair. Indeed, the hon. Member for North Down (Mr. Kilfedder) and my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test (Mr. Hill), to whom I have spoken, were observers at those elections, and I am happy to say that they endorse that judgment, as does the high commissioner in Sri Lanka.

On the other matter that my hon. Friend mentioned, of course, should any evidence of illegal activity be noted or observed by anyone in London, that would be a matter for the police. At present, the LTTE's office in London is entitled to stay here. If anyone can provide any evidence that should be drawn to the attention of the police, we shall be happy to do that.

Mr. Tony Banks : Has the Minister any information about whether Tamil Tigers were involved in the cruel assassination of Rajiv Gandhi? What communications have passed between Her Majesty's Government and the Indian Government about Mr. Gandhi's assassination?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : No evidence of the kind suggested by the hon. Gentleman has come to our knowledge. Let us hope that evidence is soon available about the identity of

Column 919

the perpetrators of that dreadful crime. Her Majesty's Government and, indeed, Her Majesty the Queen, have sent messages to Mr. Gandhi's family and to the Indian Government about that terrible incident.

Mr. Kilfedder : Does the Minister agree that the elections in Sri Lanka--which everyone concurred were free and fair--open up a period of political stability in that country? Does he agree that that, along with the exceptional talents of its people, will ensure that Sri Lanka plays a great and dominant role in the future?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : I very much hope that my hon. Friend is right. We welcome the elections as having been free and fair. However, my hon. Friend will be aware that Sri Lanka has other problems to attend to before it can move swiftly forward on a path of prosperity.

Yugoslavia

8. Sir Russell Johnston : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has had any recent discussions with the Government of Yugoslavia.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Douglas Hogg) : I visited Yugoslavia from 25 to 28 February and met representatives of the Federal and Republican Governments. The Yugoslav Prime Minister, Mr. Markovic, called on my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 15 April. I saw the deputy Foreign Minister on the same day. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is in touch with the Foreign Minister.

Sir Russell Johnston : When the Minister contacts the Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia, will he tell him, first, that in the view of all democratic opinion in Europe no military solution to Yugoslavia's regional and national problems would be acceptable and, secondly, that the British Government would be willing to argue in the European Community in favour of the EC's taking on a role of mediation and perhaps even providing a peace- keeping force?

Mr. Hogg : On the role of the Yugoslav army, I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that it would be a disaster if it were used in the way that he described. It should be used only as a genuine peace-keeping force within Yugoslavia.

On the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I do not think that the European Community should play such a role. However, we should explore the possibility of finding within the conference on security and co- operation in Europe some method for offering good offices to the republics and provinces of Yugoslavia. To achieve that and make it effective would require the consent of all relevant parties.

Mr. Wareing : Have not the Government shown a complacent attitude to Yugoslavia? Do not the ethnic troubles in Yugoslavia threaten to overflow into other parts of Europe? As Europeans in one European home, we now have a responsibility. Should not the Government make a positive attempt to bring the European Community into discussions with the Federal Government of Yugoslavia and recognise that Federal Government as a proper member of the Council of Europe?

Column 920

Mr. Hogg : I do not think that the hon. Gentleman has done his homework. We have not been complacent. Indeed, our intervention in early January was given credit by the Croatian people for having prevented an invasion of Croatia by the Yugoslav army at that time. I do not believe that the European Community has a role to play. I have said that the CSCE might have a role to play if we could persuade all the parties to agree to use their good offices. Arab-Israel Dispute

9. Mr. Norman Hogg : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress to date in resolving the Arab-Israel dispute.

Mr. Hurd : We welcome continuing American efforts to restart the middle east peace process, as I emphasised to Mr. Baker in Washington on Monday. With our EC partners, we have given them our full support. There has been some progress towards acceptance of the idea of a peace conference. Important differences remain, but there is enough encouragement to wear down those differences in order to get a conference under way.

Mr. Hogg : Has the Foreign Secretary read the remarks attributed to Mr. David Gore-Booth, an Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office? Do those remarks assist the Government's endeavours with the peace process, and are senior civil servants at the Foreign Office entitled to make such speeches under the cloak of a personal capacity? Will the right hon. Gentleman please clarify the position on that?

Mr. Hurd : After speaking on 20 March to a meeting of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, on lines which set out Government policy, Mr. Gore-Booth answered questions. A report on this appeared just the other day. Some of his answers gave personal views, not Government policy, as he made clear at the time. [ Hon. Members : "Why?"] Mr. Gore-Booth is a talented and experienced public servant. I intend to take no further action.

Sir Dennis Walters : Despite the recent tendentious press attacks aimed at undermining Britain's role in the middle east, which have just been aired again, does not my right hon. Friend agree that Britain and Europe have an important part to play, either in supporting Secretary Baker's initiative or in replacing it if it is blocked because of Israeli intransigence, as, regrettably, now seems likely?

Mr. Hurd : I agree about supporting it. I do not believe that a European initiative could replace the active and energetic efforts of the United States. That is the view of the Twelve. We have deliberately stepped back from putting our own ideas and initiatives directly so as to give Mr. Baker's efforts a fair wind. I still think that that is the right policy.

Mr. Benn : Is the Foreign Secretary aware that there will be no permanent peace in the middle east until there is a Palestinian state? A clear statement on those lines by the British Government and other Governments would accelerate a long drawn out peace process that has no prospect of success while the Americans accept that there is an Israeli veto on the proposition.

Column 921

Mr. Hurd : We believe in the right of the Palestinians to exercise self-determination. The outcome of that is not for us to decide. To get this process under way, a conference must be held, which must include both tracks of negotiation--between Israel and the Arab states, which are still in a state of war or a state of belligerency with her, and between Israel and representative Palestinians. That, in essence, is the Baker plan, and we believe that it is the only sensible way to proceed.

Mr. Latham : Does my right hon. Friend agree that if progress is to be made there must be confidence-building measures on both sides? One important confidence-building measure, if the United Nations is represented at the conference, would be the rescinding of the "Zionism is racism" resolution.

Mr. Hurd : I think that that would be difficult to achieve, but my hon. Friend is right about confidence-building measures. An important confidence-building measure would be a stop to new settlements on the west bank. If that were forthcoming, it would be reasonable to ask Arab states to look at the operation of the boycott. It is possible to imagine, on both sides, confidence-building measures that would help the parties to get to grips with the essential central matters of substance.

Mr. Anderson : We pay tribute to the tireless efforts of Mr. Baker in seeking to find an acceptable peace formula for the middle east. Can the Foreign Secretary say whether, plausibly, there is any life left in those peace efforts, as Syria appears to have been written out of the script and the Israeli Prime Minister has said in terms that there will be no trading of land for peace?

Mr. Hurd : Following my talk with Mr. Baker on Monday, I believe that there is enough encouragement--though not a breakthrough--for him to persevere. That is also his view. The issues that have not yet been successfully tackled are the exact role of the United Nations in the process and whether the conference would be a once-for-all conference which would launch the discussions on the two tracks that I have described or whether it would be resumed from time to time. Those are important points of difference. There is also the question of Palestinian representation, on which some progress has been made. But the points of difference are not so overwhelming as to justify writing off the whole process.

Mr. John Marshall : Does my right hon. Friend really believe that Mr. Gore-Booth's not-so-youthful indiscretions really helped Britain in its role as an honest broker in the middle east? Does he agree that any Minister who was as indiscreet as that mandarin would have been asked for his or her resignation? Should not Mr. Gore-Booth be treated similarly?

Mr. Hurd : I have said what I have to say on that matter. When people go to meetings which they believe to be private and answer questions in an expressly personal capacity, the House must show some understanding of their position. I have confidence in Mr. Gore-Booth, with whom I have worked for a long time and, as I have said, I intend to take no further action in the matter. As my hon. Friend knows, we have close dialogue with the

Column 922

Government of Israel--perhaps closer and more intimate than for some years. I welcome that and intend to maintain it, and I see no difficulty in doing so.

Iraq

10. Mr. Campbell-Savours : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next intends to meet representatives of political groups within Iraq.

Next Section

Home Page