TUESDAY 30 MARCH 1999

THE RT HON JOYCE QUIN, MP, MR DAVID REDDAWAY and MS FIONA PATERSON  

  40.  Minister, may I pursue this line that Mr Mackinlay has taken? What people in Gibraltar want, as people in Thurrock, I imagine, would want, is effective action. I accept that cutting up rough is sometimes a diversion from effective action. Could you perhaps expand, given that even if you have had a slight amelioration of conditions for people in Gibraltar clearly we have not had delivered everything that we might have wished, on what further measures are being examined by the Foreign Office so that we can progress the matter effectively?
  (Ms Quin)  I accept that not everything has been done that I would have liked to see done. I believe that the action that we have taken has been responsible for reducing the border delays but there are still a large number of other areas where I would like to see more progress. Myself and officials in the Foreign Office try and evaluate all the areas of difficulty with Spain as far as Gibraltar is concerned and then look at how we can make progress in all the different areas. Those include a variety of European Union issues and European Union legislation. They include a variety of financial and business or company measures, and also of course they include measures to do with the border and measures to do with fisheries and other interests as well. We have to keep all these different areas under examination in order to try and move towards a more satisfactory outcome in all the different areas.

  41.  Have we explored the levers that we have that might be used to help persuade the Spanish Government?
  (Ms Quin)  Of course, and indeed those are the matters that we raise at the different ministerial levels which I described, but one has to evaluate all the possible actions we can take both for their advantages and also for their disadvantages.

  42.  Can I preface this by saying that I personally am deeply saddened, because I value the Spanish and British relations, by the position that has been adopted over the last little while. Can I first ask, Minister, do you regret the ambiguity in the status of Gibraltar in EU terms? It seems to me that Gibraltar has a much less well defined position than the overseas territories of France, Spain or Portugal, that it is not written into EU statute and the EU Treaty in the same way, and that this has served to reduce the opportunities for Gibraltar within the Union over recent years?
  (Ms Quin)  Yes, I think there is something in that. Obviously, it is always impossible to turn the clock back and it is always easy to be wise with hindsight. All I can say is that I understand at the time the arrangements that were made they were made in consultation with Gibraltar, but when one looks at the European Union today and some of the practical difficulties that the Gibraltarians have experienced, then sometimes it seems to me that if that arrangement had perhaps been more clearcut from the outset it would have been easier in discussions and negotiations that we have had.

  43.  But meanwhile Gibraltar has its particular relationship with Britain whereby the Gibraltarian Government and the various authorities are answerable to the Crown. Is it acceptable that Spain should refuse to recognise the competence of authorities in Gibraltar who are answerable to the Crown, who are the agents of the Crown, for instance, the Royal Gibraltarian Police, who are in the same status as any other police force in the United Kingdom?
  (Ms Quin)  I certainly regret that the Spaniards have not been willing to accept competent authorities in the way that we have defined them in order to include Gibraltar authorities, and I think if there was a recognition of those authorities it would be a big step forward in creating a better relationship over Gibraltar.

  44.  Spain is also an ally with Britain in Nato.
  (Ms Quin)  Indeed.

  45.  Involved in current operations, and yet we have a British port which apparently is out of bounds for joint operations on the grounds that Spain will not accept Nato operations going into Gibraltar. Is that true and is it acceptable?
  (Ms Quin)  I understand that there are certainly still some restrictions which the Spaniards impose on military activity as far as Gibraltar is concerned within Nato, although some restrictions were lifted at the time of Spanish accession into Nato. I am sure we can provide information although this may be also one of the issues which I think the Committee has raised in its questions and its memoranda. It certainly is an area where we feel restrictions are unnecessary. What has been good is that some of Gibraltar's assets have been able to be used in combined Nato operations, and in that sense that has been a step forward for Gibraltar.

  46.  But there is always this heavy qualification, is there not, that we accept that Spain can treat Gibraltar in a way which we would not accept for any other part of British territory within the European Union? When we negotiate treaties we seem to be prepared to accept that Spain can effectively exercise a veto even on areas where there is no veto. I give two examples: the driving disqualification conventions and the EURODAC convention. Why was it that Britain was prepared to accept the exclusion of Gibraltar on those conventions at the diktat of Spain? Why were the British Government not prepared to block those conventions proceeding until such time as Gibraltar could be incorporated?
  (Ms Quin)  Of course sometimes we do block things because they have excluded Gibraltar. The one example that comes most recently to mind is the European Union's ramp checks directive in this transport field of aviation safety, where we had a dispute over competent authorities and whether Gibraltar would be included. We blocked that even though it was not exactly a popular blocking move as far as the other Member States of the European Union were concerned. In terms of the two that you have mentioned, neither of those is adoptable by qualified majority voting and therefore it is possible for Spain to veto them.

  47.  And for us.
  (Ms Quin)  And for us, yes. You are right, that we have not done it on every occasion, and obviously the Committee will be considering its own view on this matter. We have taken the view that sometimes we feel that it is unacceptable and we will veto the legislation. Occasionally, though, if the legislation is felt to be very much in the interests of the United Kingdom as a whole, we do allow that exclusion of Gibraltar to take place.

  48.  You would not with Sedgefield, though, would you?
  (Ms Quin)  Indeed, let me answer for my own constituency. Occasionally measures are adopted in the European Union which affect different parts of Britain in different ways. We know for example on fisheries regulations that there may be regulations that are more in favour of, say, Scottish fishermen than with south western fishermen.

  49.  But, with respect, not legal exclusions. We would not accept something that said, "The whole of the United Kingdom but we will leave out Cornwall". Well, we might, but I hope not.
  (Ms Quin)  The point I am making is that you do not always take the interests of one area to the exclusion of all other interests.

  50.  Having said that, Minister, we understand that there are certainly wider United Kingdom interests, for example, on driving licences, and it was perhaps not appropriate for us to veto that. Have we actively sought various items which are not so much relevant to us but which are of interest to Spain, the olive oil directive or something of that nature, where we could show that we also can be difficult?
  (Ms Quin)  First, it is not always clear that being difficult ourselves is necessarily going to be the best way of making progress as far as Gibraltar is concerned. Secondly, in areas like olive oil, where you are talking about agricultural issues, those are adopted by qualified majority voting and it would simply not be possible for one country to block them.

  51.  I am still trying to discover where the straw lies that breaks this particular camel's back. Sr Matutes has suggested that a measure that he might consider is the blocking of civil aviation flights overflying Spain towards Gibraltar. What would the British Government do if Spain attempted that?
  (Ms Quin)  We would very strongly condemn any such approach.

  52.  But what would you do?
  (Ms Quin)  I am not quite sure why the Committee laughs, because in fact we have said that we believe that that would be quite wrong and unprecedented and extraordinary for any country in the European Union to ban overflights from one part of the European Union to another.

  53.  We had the Berlin Council last week and Spain had a vital national interest in its cohesion funds. It walked out of a successful negotiation and yet at the same time we have this situation in Gibraltar and the British Government apparently waving it all on, prepared to meet the Prime Minister of Spain at a high level summit in a few weeks' time, with very little, it seems to us—I cannot speak for my colleagues but it seems to me—in the way of an active negotiating position adopted by Britain in order to protect Gibraltarian interests. When I hear the rhetoric I hear the nice words but I do not see the iron fist in the velvet glove.
  (Ms Quin)  Again I simply do not accept that. At the meetings that we hold of the European Union and the Council of Ministers we have meetings with our Spanish counterparts on practically every occasion and make these points very strongly. It is just not true that we do not raise these issues. Obviously, in Agenda 2000, which is what you are talking about when you are talking about the cohesion, which was part of a huge package which this Committee has itself been following very closely in terms of the future financing, in terms of the structural funds, in terms of the common agricultural policy, I do not know whether you are saying that we should have blocked the whole of the package on Gibraltar. It is true that the Government did not take the view that we should block the whole of Agenda 2000 for that issue, important though we believe it is.

  54.  I was just suggesting that Spain might find it a little bit more difficult to persuade Britain to accede to requests which are in Spanish national interests whilst it is applying the sanctions that it is.
  (Ms Quin)  Spain does not find it easy to persuade Britain to agree to such requests when there is an obvious attempt to exclude Gibraltar.

  55.  What you are saying, Minister, is that HMG's defence of the principle of consent is impregnable.
  (Ms Quin)  I am indeed.

  56.  You will recall that I asked you one Friday morning, I think it was, on the floor of the House that the principle of consent was enshrined—is enshrined—in the Good Friday agreement. In that case there are two Governments involved and agreement was reached based upon that principle of consent. In relation to the EU, the position of citizens—and I am not going to mention Greenock and Inverclyde to you—are there any differences in relation to EU laws between the people who live in Ceuta and Melilla and Gibraltar? Is it not the case that the people in those Spanish colonies in North Africa enjoy EU privileges if you like that are denied to the people of Gibraltar?
  (Ms Quin)  They certainly have a different status in the European Union from Gibraltar which dates from the respective accession treaties and which is really the point that Mr Heath was making earlier. Certainly the different arrangements that exist in the European Union can have an effect as to how easy or how difficult it is to defend particular interests in the European Union context. My understanding is that Ceuta and Melilla are similar to the French departements d'outre-mer and therefore are held to be an integral part of the Member State.

  57.  Can I say that I agree with Phyllis Starkey? It does not always pay off to cut up rough in negotiations, but nevertheless a degree of firmness does not go amiss. In relation to what David Heath has to say about the blocking of flights over Spain or the hampering of people crossing from Spain into Gibraltar, which we saw for ourselves, is there not likely to be a case there in relation to Article 227 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take the Spanish Government to the European Court of Justice and, dependent upon its response to the European Commission, would the Government give very serious consideration to putting the Spanish Government into that court?
  (Ms Quin)  On overflights, all that I have seen about it was one comment that was made by the Spanish Foreign Minister. There certainly has not been a specific measure put forward. If one was put forward we would contest it very firmly, if I can use your word. I would also like to say that I do not feel that the Committee should confuse an unwillingness to indulge in wild rhetoric with a lack of determination to represent the interests of Gibraltar.

  58.  Can I say that I think that that is a very fair observation, but what I am saying is that I said earlier that the Commission took the British Government to court in the eighties and the British Government lost and had to alter a recently enacted Act of Parliament. The gap between the Royal Assent and the ECJ's decision on section 14 of that Act was something like 11 months. What I am asking you is: has the Government the determination if the circumstances demand it, to invoke Article 227 of that Treaty and place the matter into the hands of the European Court of Justice, this hampering, this obstruction, of the free movement of people within the European Union?
  (Ms Quin)  The Government, in such serious circumstances, would obviously look at all the options available to it. I think the correct procedure is none the less to go to the Commission first, then to get the view of the Commission's legal services, and then look further at the situation in the light of that. I imagine that was done in the earlier case that was referred to but, as I said to you before, I would have to look at the details.

  59.  You will check on that and give us a reply?
  (Ms Quin)  Indeed.