asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what items he hopes to place on the agenda for the next meeting of the Council of Ministers of the EEC.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the agenda for the next meeting of the Council of Ministers of the EEC.

A meeting of the Council of Ministers is taking place today to discuss regional policy. As far as the agenda for the next meeting of the Council is concerned, I would refer to the estimate of subject headings likely to come up for discussion in the Council meeting in February. This was placed in the Vote Office on 28th January.

Whatever the hopes of people inside and outside the House, is it not now crystal clear that the difficulties arising from the regional development fund, which the Minister has just mentioned, the agricultural policy, our terms of trade and now the unprincipled scramble for oil, to say nothing of other matters, call not only for a renegotiation of our terms but for a complete review of the Treaty of Rome itself? Will the Minister seek to discuss this as soon as possible?

No, Sir. It seems to me absurd to lose heart because of discussion and debate in the Council of Ministers. We in this House conduct our affairs by debate, both between the parties and within the parties. That is a perfectly normal democratic process and that is how we would expect the Community to make progress.

It is not a question of losing heart. As the disintegration of the Common Market proceeds and as now only 12 per cent. of the British people think it a good thing that Britain joined the Common Market, may I ask what steps my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is taking to discuss within the Council of Ministers the growing feeling on the back benches that out of it we should at least salvage a free trade area? Secondly, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether the cuckoo clock in the Common Market nursery is still stopped, or is nanny starting it again?

I should certainly never accuse my hon. Friend of losing heart in this matter, because he never gained it. I respect his position, even though I disagree with him, but I think it would be wrong to talk about disintegration of the European Community. We have achieved a common approach to the negotiations in GATT; we have achieved a common approach to the security conference; we have achieved a common approach on the Middle East; we are in the process of achieving a common approach to the energy conference shortly ahead of us; and we have also achieved a common approach to have begun negotiations to try to associate a large number of Commonwealth countries with the European Community.

Does this common approach include discussions on the takeover of BP and other Western oil interests by Kuwait? Will the Minister make a statement on this pressing matter?

The hon. Gentleman knows very well that Kuwait is not a member of the Community, and I do not see how that supplementary question arises here.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will refuse accreditation to General Shazly as Egyptian ambassador.

I have nothing to add to the answer which my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary gave to the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Rose) on 23rd January.—[Vol. 867, c. 289.]

Is it not a gross affront to loyal British citizens that a person who is known to have consorted with Fascists, such as Colin Jordan and John Tindall, when he was here at the embassy in 1962 and who was prepared to spend thousands of pounds on disseminating anti-Jewish propaganda should now be imposed upon this country as ambassador? Is there not a suitable precedent for refusing accreditation when the Saudi Arabians refused to recognise Sir Horace Phillips on the ground that he was Jewish?

All the relevant factors will be taken into account when considering whether or not to grant accreditation, but I cannot enter into discussions about allegations made in the Press.

Will my noble Friend ask his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary to bear in mind my letters to him dated 10th and 15th January and his reply, and my reply to him dated 23rd January, on this very subject? Will he accept that it will be completely unacceptable to every democratic and decent person in this country that a known associate of Fascists in 1962 should in any sense be accepted in any capacity in this country?

It is internationally recognised that the reasons for granting or withholding accreditation are never given to the requesting State. It would, therefore, be quite wrong for me to discuss the factors which will be taken into account in my recommendation.

The Minister referred to allegations. Will he tell the House whether he has investigated those allegations and, if not, will he undertake to do so before this man is accepted here, particularly as details of the correspondence between him and Colin Jordan and Tindall are available?

General Shazly was, in fact, military attaché here at the embassy of the United Arab Republic from 1961 to 1964. I have no comments to make about his activities at that time.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make representations to the Government of Libya with a view to the cessation of that country's aid to the IRA.

We have made strong protests to the Libyan Government on a number of occasions about Colonel Qadhafi's support for the IRA. We have made it clear that Her Majesty's Government regard this as a blatant interference in the internal affairs of the United Kingdom.

I thank my noble Friend for that useful reply, which shows that there are still some teeth in the British lion. Is there any truth in the Press reports that the IRA has received something like £1 million in aid and training from the Libyan Government?

There are indications that the IRA may have received military aid and training from Libya, but we have no evidence that the aid is on the scale referred to by my hon. Friend.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are now daily assassinations of soldiers, police and members of the reserve police, often married men with children, by people using modern Russian weapons supplied through Libya? What replies has he had to the representations which he has made to the Libyan Government?

A close and constant watch is being kept on the supplies which are made available to the IRA. Her Majesty's Ambassador in Tripoli sought clarification from the Libyan authorities on Press reports about Libyan involvement, but we did not receive a reply.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he has advanced as Her Majesty's Government's contribution to the work of the Geneva peace conference.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the progress of the Geneva Middle East peace negotiations.

I refer to the statement my right hon. Friend made on 21st January about the latest developments in the Middle East. Our discussions with other Governments about the way ahead must remain confidential.—[Vol. 867, c. 1202–4.]

What plans will the Government put forward as a member of the Security Council about the strength and disposition of a United National peacekeeping force on the Israeli frontiers?

We have been assiduously kept informed by the United States Government on their discussions and their efforts, and they have continuously asked us for our comments. The best way for progress is that the tactical approach should remain confidential, but our policy, of course, remains firmly based on Security Council Resolution No. 242.

Since there is at least the germ of an understanding of some sort between Egypt and Israel, and as Israel has now made very useful and constructive concessions, which were overdue, to try to get a more fundamental agreement going, what pressure will my noble Friend put on Syria to make concomitant concessions at the other end of the area so that a realistic settlement may finally be negotiated without Israel having to make too many concessions before the other side does?

It would be logical that, following the disengagement between the Egyptian and Israeli forces, attention should increasingly be turned to the proximity of the Israeli and Syrian forces. How this is approached tactically should be left to those who are initiating the discussions, but this is clearly a matter which must be considered very soon.

Does not the Minister agree that the United Kingdom has considerable experience of this kind of peace-keeping operation, the kind of operation which will take over from the existing United Nations presence on the spot, and have we not worked out to a considerable extent the models for such an operation, based on our experience in Cyprus and other parts of the world? Will the noble Lord undertake that all our information and experience is made available to the United Nations or, in this case, direct to the United States?

I confirm that considerable work has been done by the British Government on preparing proposals for guaranteeing the just and lasting settlement which we all want to see achieved. Our proposals have been made available to the Governments concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further consultations he has had with the Syrian authorities regarding their failure to comply with the Geneva Convention by releasing particulars of Israeli prisoners of war held by them.

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend told the House on 21st January.—[Vol. 867, c. 1206–7.]

Is the Minister aware that for more than three months a considerable number of parents, children and other relatives, including wives, have been waiting to hear whether prisoners are alive or dead? Cannot he add something by way of unequivocal condemnation of the Syrians' continued refusal at least to issue the lists of the prisoners they hold?

We have made representations on a number of occasions to Syria that we believe that the prisoners should be returned. I hope that arrangements can now be agreed between Syria and Israel which will include a solution to this problem, but I think that bilateral representations made in the context of disengagement between Israel and Syria are more likely to be effective than representations made from outside. That is what I believe is the most constructive way forward

Can my right hon. Friend state the number of Israeli prisoners in Syrian hands?

No, Sir. I am not in a position to do so.

But surely the right hon. Gentleman will confirm that the Israelis have observed Article 8 and all the other articles of the 1930 Convention. Will he, additionally, assure the House that he will convey to the Syrian Government the unanimous feeling in the House and the country that they should observe Article 8 and the other articles? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it might be useful to approach one of the original signatories to the 1930 Convention, namely Egypt, with a view to enlisting her support in any approaches which we ourselves make bilaterally to Syria?

As I have said, we have made it clear to the Israeli and Syrian Governments that we believe that all the Geneva Conventions should be complied with. The difficulty is that the Syrians have declined to provide lists and allow the Red Cross access except in return for action by Israel, especially in connection with the Geneva Convention on civilians. We believe that all the Geneva Conventions should be applied and that they should not be attached to other conditions.

Will my right hon. Friend be a little more specific? Does he not agree that the situation with regard to the Syrian Government is totally unsatisfactory?

As I have said, we believe that the Geneva Convention should be complied with without any conditions being attached to it. We hope that that view will be followed.

Has the Minister seen the report of the Red Cross which rightly criticised both the Syrians and the Israelis for breaches of the Geneva Convention? Why has he made strong and repeated protests to the Syrians but not to the Israeli authorities?

We have made representations to all Governments concerned. We believe that the Geneva Convention should be applied. I do not think it is right to try to discriminate between one and the other. We believe that the Geneva Convention should be applied.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further discussions he plans to hold in the EEC Council of Ministers about regional policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made towards an agreed European regional policy.

My right hon. Friend is in Brussels today discussing regional policy in the Council of Ministers. The House will not expect me to speculate on the outcome of these discussions.

Recalling how often the Government have stressed that any regional fund should be of a substantial size, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is able to say whether he expects the current spirit of co-operation in the Community to produce a fund anywhere near 3,000 million units of account, as proposed by the British Government? If not, is he able to say whether there is still the expectation that there will be a substantial net benefit to Britain as the result of the establishment of such a fund in the next 12 months?

I am sure my hon. Friend will appreciate that it would not be helpful to my right hon. Friend in his discussions in Brussels if I were to speculate on the likely outcome or to contribute any view here without knowledge of what is being said in the Council of Ministers.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the British Government accept the new offer of the German Government, which is about half of what we applied for originally? Does he not recognise that the French Government appear to be trying to grab as much and give as little as they can get away with? In view of that, will the Government adopt a more robust attitude of retaliation in vetoing payments towards the common agricultural policy?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is correctly informed in his analysis either of the German proposal or of the French reaction to it. I do not think that it would help my right hon. Friend in Brussels if I were to express views today while he is sitting with his colleagues in the Council of Ministers discussing this subject.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the latest offer from the Germans, with all the restrictions that it implies, would give to the United Kingdom just about the same amount of regional help as we originally applied for?

There is no doubt that the offer made by the German Government marks a substantial advance. All the same, I do not think that it would be wise for me, while the talks are in progress in Brussels at this moment, to speculate or to give opinions on the different offers, counter-offers and other arguments that may be developed.

Will the Minister at least assure us that the British Government will not accept an annual regional payment from this fund which is less than the £90 million which the development areas are getting in regional employment premium and which they are due to lose?

As I have said, I do not think that it would help my right hon. Friend if I were to make statements or give assurances here on a subject that he is in the process of negotiating. Having had some experience of negotiating myself, I know how tiresome it can be if messages come in in the course of negotiation giving a view that inevitably must be remote from the realities of the negotiations.

While one may understand that the Minister is clearly reluctant to make any statistical speculation, will he express a political opinion—which in the past he has not been reluctant to do—as to whether he thinks that bilateral trade agreements on oil by individual members of the Community are likely to be in any way damaging to European solidarity and, consequently, the likely development of a satisfactory regional policy?

The subject of the pros and cons of bilateral arrangements with oil countries is extremely interesting, but its connection with regional policies is tenuous.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the United States Government about the imposition of sanctions on chrome from Rhodesia.

We have expressed our concern to the United States Government. The Senate recently voted to repeal the Byrd amendment and it is our hope that this will be followed by legislation to end Rhodesian chrome imports to the United States.

Will the noble Lord accept that there is a view, held certainly by Senator Humphrey and his colleagues in the United States, that the British view ought to be made more widely known? What efforts are the British Government making to influence opinion in the House of Representatives before its vote?

I think that the British view on this matter is well known. The United States administration is well aware of our views. It knows that we hope that it will secure the repeal of the Byrd amendment.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in the strategic interests of our NATO allies it would be preferable to be able to buy chrome from Rhodesia rather than from Soviet Russia or, worse still, chrome purchased by Soviet Russia from Rhodesia for resale to America at an enhanced price?

I can understand why it is important to the United States, but it is equally in the British interests and in wider interests that sanctions which have been imposed, which are being implemented by this country, should not be broken by any country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is extremely important that the British Government's view on the desirability of legislation on the Byrd amendment should be made crystal clear in Washington? Will he undertake to take that action if he has not already done so?

Both the hon. and learned Gentleman and the Government have expressed their hope that there will be legislation to end the Rhodesian chrome imports into the United States. There were no plans for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to meet Bishop Muzorewa. The bishop has now returned to Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what arrangements he has made to meet the Netherlands Foreign Minister to discuss Rhodesian sanctions.

None, Sir, but we have periodic exchanges with the Netherlands Government on this subject, and they are aware of our views.

Is the Minister aware of the widespread Press reports on the Dutch anti-apartheid investigation into the Zephyr organisation which operates from Holland and has widespread sanctions-breaking operations? Is he aware that the investigation shows that 600 companies throughout the world trade with Zephyr, of which 24 are British and 22 are based in Hong Kong? Will he agree to make available to Parliament the results of an urgent official investigation into the activities of this company operating from Holland?

I am aware of that report. I understand that the Netherlands authorities are investigating the matter. In so far as British companies are concerned, inquiries are being made in this country and also in Hong Kong to establish whether there have been any breaches of sanctions. So far, no evidence has been produced to show that there has been any violation of our control. On the question of publication, it is not customary to publish results of such investigations.

Would it not be rather more fruitful if my right hon. Friend could give the House an indication of how the discussions between Mr. Smith's Government and the ANC are getting on?

I can only suggest that my hon. Friend puts down a Question, which I shall certainly try to answer.

As this matter concerns Holland, could it not be raised in the Council of Ministers so that, through that organisation, we could impose sanctions on those members of the Common Market which are breaking sanctions on Rhodesia?

It would not be appropriate to raise the question of sanctions in the Community forum. Sanctions are primarily a matter for the United Nations, which would seem to be the most appropriate forum in which to raise the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has yet studied the report of the Committee of Nine presented to the 19th Session of the North Atlantic Assembly held in Ankara last October; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The Committee of Nine's report is a valuable contribution to public discussion of current issues in the transatlantic relationship. I welcome its publication, and in particular the stress that it lays on the continuing importance of the alliance to all its members.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Can he confirm that any action has been taken on any of the recommendations made by these distinguished people?

I agree about the distinction of the group of people who made the recommendations. Taking action will be discussed within the alliance, as it is a matter for all the members of the alliance.

In view of the military and political problems in NATO today, will the Government consider carefully the references in that report to NATO providing greater opportunities for Members of Parliament of Europe and Canada, as well as United States Congressmen, to debate those problems?

Yes, Sir. I shall certainly consider that.

In view of the great importance which I know Her Majesty's Government attach to improving relations between both sides of the North Atlantic alliance, will the Government give serious consideration to the recommendation that the North Atlantic Assembly, which is the only parliamentary body in which both North American and European parliamentarians meet together, should be given some kind of official recognition in this country? Will he urge the Government to press this recommendation on other European countries too? Is he aware that this is one of the matters that annoy our American allies, as they themselves recognise the North Atlantic Assembly officially in Congress?

Yes, Sir. I have noted that important recommendation. Her Majesty's Government have no objection in principle to a change in the status of the assembly. As my hon. Friend will know, however, any change that amounted to official recognition would require a decision by all 15 allied Governments.

Will the Under-Secretary give us an assurance that the Foreign Secretary's study of this very important report included a particular study of the notes of reservation as presented by individual members of the committee? If not, will a further study do so, particularly on the reservations on the subject of nuclear strategy?

Yes, Sir. We are studying all the reservations, as well as the main body of the report.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will raise the issue of political union at the next EEC Council meeting.

I do not think that there is any need for us to raise the issue. The Council meeting on 15th January considered how best to approach the preparation of the report on European union. This is the report which the Community institutions have been asked to draw up before the end of 1975 as a submission to a summit conference. The presidency may arrange a further discussion of these procedures at the next Council meeting, which I think is to fall on 4th and 5th February.

When did the British Parliament and people give their full-hearted consent to this proposition about political union?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that, as has already been made clear, Parliament will be able to express its views at every step on the procedure towards European union.

If the Government and the Common Market are aiming at political union, it goes without saying that Europe will eventually speak with one voice. If that is so, surely we can have one European embassy instead of nine in each country, and the logic of that is that we can cut the Foreign Office staff by at least 60 per cent.

I have no doubt there would be considerable support within the Foreign Office for a generous golden bowler scheme on the lines which my hon. Friend appears to advocate. But we are a very long way from that just yet.

Will not the Minister agree that the point about political union is that it must be preceded by a much better working relationship at Council of Ministers level than appears presently to exist? Could the Government give an assurance that they will concentrate on that as a first priority? There will be plenty of time later to talk about political union.

We are trying to work out close relationships and concerted policies in a number of areas—trade, monetary, political and others. It will take some time, and when we achieve—if we do—European union, as I hope we shall, there will still be a great deal of debate within the union as there is in this House of Commons.

Why should Parliament not have an opportunity to debate this matter at this stage?

As I said, Parliament will have every opportunity to express its views at every stage in the process towards union.

Does not the Minister agree that there is something grotesque in talking about political union when our partners in the EEC are reneging in the most shameless way on the question of a regional fund, which was much trumpeted by the Conservative Party when Britain entered a year ago?

No, Sir. It is absurd to talk about our partners reneging. They are making great efforts to arrive at a common point of view. It would be ridiculous to suggest that Britain was a divided country just because we have debates on a number of questions.

Does the Minister agree that if the concept of political union is not a dead duck, it is at least a lame duck? Would it not be better if, instead of spending time and energy pursuing this unattractive chimera, more effort were put into dealing with immediate and practical problems, such as re-establishing a free market in oil products in Western Europe and, in addition, renegotiating the ludicrous terms of entry which his right hon. Friend negotiated?

No, Sir. The right hon. Gentleman's faint-heartedness is of a kind that would never lead to success in any endeavour.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the international discussions resumed in Vienna on 17th January on force reductions and on initiatives Her Majesty's Government are taking towards that end.

The parties concerned in the negotiations are now engaged in exploring the ideas and proposals put forward during the opening session. On all aspects of these negotiations Her Majesty's Government have worked in concert with their allies.

Does the Minister think it helpful, or unhelpful, to the success of these vital discussions that Britain should be increasing by 8 per cent. its arms spending over the next four years, according to the recent Government survey of expenditure?

If the hon. Gentleman's question is judged in the context of the very great increase in Warsaw Pact strength in recent years, I am bound to say that I do not think that the minor steps we are taking to strengthen what is already too weak a defensive position are open to criticism.

Will my right hon. Friend please confirm that Her Majesty's Government have not the slightest intention of reducing by one man the British content of our NATO forces?

It would be wrong of me to go into the detail of the negotiation, but I can say that in the first stage we envisage reductions only of Soviet and American troops. It would be in the second stage that we would begin to consider European troops from Eastern and Western Europe.

Did the Minister engage in discussion with his European NATO allies about the implications for Europe's contribution both to her defence and to these international negotiations prior to announcing the cuts in public expenditure on defence? If not, why not?

As the hon. Member will know, we keep in extremely close touch with our NATO allies on all aspects of our contribution to the defence of Europe, and there is no exception in this case.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has made any arrangements for a further meeting with the Spanish Foreign Secretary to discuss the future of Gibraltar.

As I have recently told the House, there are no current plans for a further meeting with the Spanish Foreign Minister.—[Vol. 864, c. 418.]

Is the Minister aware that since his right hon. Friend's last meeting with the Spanish Foreign Secretary a number of Spaniards have received savage prison sentences for trying to organise a trade union there and, according to many neutral observers, without any semblance of a fair trial? Does the Minister think that this is the appropriate time to discuss the future of Gibraltar and handing it over to this Fascist tyranny, bearing in mind that Gibraltar already enjoys the benefits of free trade unionism?

As I have explained, there are no current plans for a further meeting with the Spanish Foreign Minister, and the people of Gibraltar, including trade unionists, are very conscious of the advantages which they enjoy compared with those not enjoyed by people on the other side of the border.

If and when a further meeting takes place, will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of acknowledging Spanish sovereignty of the Rock in return for taking the Rock back on a 999-year lease, with appropriate safeguards for the Gibraltarian population?

It will never stay empty that long.

No, Sir. I think experience has shown that leases with a time scale on them are subject to compression, and in any case we have made it perfectly clear that we would not countenance any transference of sovereignty unless and until the people of Gibraltar expressed a democratic wish for such a transfer.

While welcoming my right hon. Friend's reply, may I ask him whether he will assure the House that, when there are talks with the Spanish Government, the Government in Gibraltar will always be kept informed both before and after those talks?

Yes, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman seize an opportunity to make it abundantly clear to the Spanish Government that, as long as they persist in their present attitude towards human rights, Spain can hardly expect to be received into any international association designed to promote or protect human rights?

I hope that the Spanish Government will take note of the hon. and learned Gentleman's remarks.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on relations between Her Majesty's Government and Egypt.

I am glad to be able to state that relations between Britain and Egypt are excellent.

While welcoming friendly relations between Her Majesty's Government and Egypt, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether Her Majesty's Government have accepted General Shazly as ambassador to this country? If so, is it dependent upon General Shazly's not resuming contacts with the previous subversive organisations with which he was in contact when he was in this country before?

I have nothing to add to my earlier answer to the Question posed by the hon. Member for Hackney, Central (Mr. Clinton Davis)—that the request is under consideration.

Bearing in mind the important problems of mutual interest between Britain and the Arab countries, will the Foreign Secretary take the initiative in organising a conference as soon as possible, preferably before the summer, between European and Arab countries to discuss these problems?

I know that my hon. Friend has just returned from Cairo and I shall certainly consider his suggestion with great care. The Arab countries have taken note of the statement made by the European countries, which has been welcomed by the Arab countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Comonwealth Affairs what recent request for recognition he has received from the so-called "Republic of Guinea Bissau".

The African Party for the Independence of Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde (PAIGC), which declared an independent "Republic of Guinea Bissau" on 25th September 1973, has made no request to Her Majesty's Government for recognition.

As a number of Governments recognise this fantasy while Her Majesty's Government and many other Governments have rightly decided that this entity does not satisfy any of the criteria for recognition, would it not be well for Her Majesty's Government to ask the United Nations Secretary-General to accept repeated invitations from the Portuguese Government to visit Bissau and see the situation for himself and on behalf of the United Nations?

The decision whether to recognise a Government rests with the individual countries. As I have told the House, we do not recognise the republic because it does not meet our criteria for recognition. These criteria are based upon common sense and are the same criteria as were used by Labour Members when they were in office.

Is it the Government's view that the Republic of Guinea Bissau is in control of the territory of which it claims to be in control?

No, it is not our view that the Republic of Guinea Bissau is in control of the territories it claims to control. It claims that the PAIGC controls a major part of Portuguese Guinea. We do not believe that to be true; nor do we believe that it commands anything like the obedience of the population

May I follow that by asking ——

Order. The hon. and learned Gentleman was not called

With respect, I was called. It is for you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, not the hon. Member for Chigwell (Mr Biggs-Davison), to decide whether I am in order.

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It was not audible in the Chamber that you called the hon. and learned Gentleman.

I did call the hon. and learned Gentleman, and I am sorry if I was not audible.

Does it follow from what the Minister has just said that if the Government were satisfied that PAIGC was in control of the area, they would then be prepared to recognise the republic?

That is a hypothetical question. If such a situation arises, we shall use the usual criteria. But the position at the moment is that the Portuguese continue to control the greater part of the territory, including the main towns and the means of communication, so the question does not arise.

The Minister has referred to the criteria required for recognition as being based upon common sense. Is it not the case that they are based upon international law? Is it not also the case that there is growing discontent in international legal circles about these criteria? Will the Government consider initiating discussion about whether the international law of recognition should be developed within, for example, the International Law Commission itself, to take account of changing political realities?

The criteria for recognition must be decided by individual Governments. We are satisfied, as were hon. Gentlemen opposite when in office, that the criteria we use are wise and sensible.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many British citizens are at present in custody awaiting trial in Spain.

Thirty-eight United Kingdom citizens.

Is the Minister aware that one of my constituents, a 19-year-old seaman by the name of Michael Murray, has been held in prison awaiting trial for six months in Spain? Can the Minister confirm that the date of the trial has now been fixed and, secondly, can he give me the dates of the consular visits to Michael Murray since his imprisonment?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, his constituent Mr. Murray, being a former seaman, is the concern of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. But I can give him the dates on which the vice-consul at Las Palmas has visited Mr. Murray, and Mr. Terrell, with whom he is imprisoned: on 4th and 6th September, 3rd, 24th and 26th October, 15th November and 10th January. In addition, they are visited weekly by American evangelists, who usually contact the consul beforehand for any necessary messages. The parents of Mr. Terrell saw both men frequently during their visit to Las Palmas in December. These are factors which the consul would take into consideration in timing his visits.

When he is making representations to the Spanish Government on subjects on which his Department can make representations, will my hon. Friend make representations about the continued attitude of the Spanish Government towards the British people of Gibraltar, who have suffered economic blockade for nearly 12 years?

That is a different question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to reach an agreement with the French Government on the demarcation line in the English Channel for oil exploration purposes.

We are continuing, together with the French Government, to examine means of finding an early solution to the delimitation of the Continental Shelf in both the English Channel and the Western Approaches.

Yes, but in view of the importance of exploiting our own oil resources as some of this area seems to promise oil and natural gas resources, cannot these conversations be speeded up?

We are anxious to get a settlement as soon as possible.

Has the Foreign Office asked the French Government what their thoughts are about the official Liberal Party spokesman's proposal of a dam across the Channel? What do the French Government think about locks being included in the dam to allow ships through? Are the French Government happy about the possibility of paying compensation for the flooding of half Holland and most of East Anglia?

I apologise to the Liberal Party if we have not been sufficiently active in bringing its proposals to the attention of the French Government. I am afraid that we have not done so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the international aid con sortia with a view to counteracting the limitations on the scope of overseas aid imposed by Section 114 of the United States Foreign Assistance Act.

I have made none, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the section in question has been amended by the recent United States Act to prevent the use of foreign assistance by recipient countries for the promotion or encouragement of abortion? Is he aware that, according to the article in The Times by Caroline Moorehead on 21st January, one-third of the world's pregnancies end in abortion, and can he estimate the impact that a 50 per cent. increase in the velocity of the population explosion would have? Will he take steps to restore the freedom of recipient countries to deal with their population problems as they themselves think best, having regard to the circumstances prevailing in those countries?

We have given a great deal of attention to these problems, and our aid for family planning in developing countries which want our assistance has been increasing considerably. But our own aid is not used to provide abortions and I feel, therefore, that there is no cause for the kind of intervention which the hon. Gentleman has suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many experts in telecommunications have been supplied to developing countries in the last year; what support has been given to supplying British-made equipment; and if he will make a statement.

Forty-two experts were recruited during 1973; and in the previous year about £1·9 million was provided from British aid funds for the purchase of British equipment for telecommunications projects in 1972.

I welcome the aid which is being given, but would the right hon. Gentleman look again at the help being given in embassies and high commissions to the export of telephone equipment? I have in mind in particular Associated Automation in my constituency, which is doing excellent work in Zambia and a number of other countries because of the support given through the Minister's Department. In other areas, however, the situation is like a desert. Will the right hon. Gentleman issue instructions to every embassy?

I think that all our posts abroad are well aware of the importance of these exports. Not only are we doing what I outlined in my original answer, but it would be difficult to calculate the money from general loans which also are devoted to this purpose. I shall see that our posts are made well aware of this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what changes he is making in the United Kingdom aid programme following the recent increases in the price of oil which came into force in January 1974.

I have no present plans to make changes.

Apart from the all-important question of our ability to pay, does not my right hon. Friend recognise that the recent surge in oil and commodity prices has dramatically improved the economic position of some countries, such as Nigeria and Zambia, while others such as India are a great deal worse off? Is it not time that there was a dramatic reallocation of our aid programme so that it fitted the present realities?

The position, as my hon. Friend knows, is that already one-quarter of the aid programme goes to India. I realise that the burden—my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said so publicly—on the developing countries without oil will be very great. We are, therefore, considering the whole matter very carefully.

In view of the adverse effect of the oil crisis on Jamaica, have the Government received any request for extra aid from Jamaica? If so, to what extent will the Government ensure that such additional aid is quickly forthcoming?

I have had representations from a number of developing countries, including Jamaica, about the burden of the extra cost of oil on their economies. As I have said, the Government are considering very carefully what they can do to help in this situation.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the estimate which has been made that the rise in the price of oil will mean that the cost per year for the developing countries will exceed total official and private flows from rich to poor countries? If he does agree, is it not essential, first, that there should be urgent discussions with those oil-producing countries which are now to have vastly increased revenues and, second, as his hon. Friend has said, that there should be a totally new look at the aid framework? Were these matters discussed with the Shah of Iran by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Switzerland last weekend?

The right hon. Lady is right in her general assessment of the order of this burden which the developing countries are suffering. It is certainly our hope that the oil-producing countries which will receive a considerable increase in their funds will look very sympathetically at the needs of the developing countries. As the right hon. Lady knows, a number of the oil-producing countries already help the developing countries, and the developing countries themselves are making approaches to the oil-producing countries to this end.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth affairs what proportion of British aid to Bangladesh during 1974 will be in the form of commodity aid.

The total of commodity loans, outstanding and under consideration, is about £6 million. I hope to offer a further loan this year. These loans are likely to provide most of our aid to Bangladesh, but I cannot give a precise proportion.

Does the Minister agree that economic recovery in Bangladesh is seriously hampered by acute shortages of goods and services essential to the economy? Can he give an assurance, even though project aid, which I know the Government are keen to encourage, is important in the longer term, that while these shortages persist commodity loans will be maintained at a high level?

I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance, as I have said already, that we are considering a further commodity loan, and about £3½ million is at present available from past and present loans for disbursement for purposes of this kind in Bangladesh.

Will the right hon. Gentleman seek the aid of his right hon. Friend to make certain that the Western European countries increase the aid not only to Bangladlesh but to India, to ensure that that part of the world can progress in social affairs? There is too much poverty there, more than we realise.

We are anxious that our partners in the Community and other aid donors should increase their aid to these very poor countries that will suffer great burdens from the increased oil prices.

Will the Minister bear in mind, having regard to the answers he has given not only to this but to the preceding Question, that, although there are immense demands from every part of the world, the particular problems of Bangladesh in the immediate situation resulting from oil prices and from the disasters of the past two years justify special attention, particularly as, if additional aid is not forthcoming, the population of that area is liable to explode even faster?

I am well aware, as the hon. Gentleman knows, of the problems of Bangladesh, which I was considering with the High Commissioner only yesterday. But I think he will know that in the past two years we have pledged a large sum in relief aid and in commodity aid. As I told his hon. Friend, we are prepared to consider another commodity loan in the near future.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has any statement to make about the situation in Grenada.

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. When I went to put down a Private Notice Question about Grenada I was told that as Question No. 26 was on the Order Paper it would be answered in that way. As it has not been reached, may I ask whether the Minister is prepared to make a statement, because this is a serious matter?

I think this is a matter that the hon. Lady and the Government had best settle together. It is not a point of order for me.

If it is your wish, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am willing to answer Question No. 26.

Very well. The Minister will answer the Question.

rose——

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Would it not be for the convenience of the House if the clock above your head were synchronised with the digital clock, which no hon. Member can see, on the Clerk's desk?

As far as I know, all the clocks in the Chamber are synchronised. The time is what I choose to make it, neither more nor less.

With permission, I will answer Question No. 26.

As the island is supposed to become independent on 7th February and as the West Indies Act states in Schedule 2 that there could be a referendum before independence, may I ask whether that will be considered?

Will my right hon. Friend tell us whether it is true—we have heard rumours—that many people, including the Governor, have fled from Grenada to neighbouring islands and that some people fear that there may be a danger of civil war in the island? In those circumstances, will he confirm that Prince Richard will no longer go to the independence celebrations? Will he also tell us whether arrangements are being made to evacuate British residents in Grenada, if necessary, and what other action, if any, we could usefully take to help?

It would be wrong for me to try to prophesy future events. It is true that a number of persons have left the island because of the disturbances that have taken place there. I repeat that no violent demonstrations have been reported in the last few days and there have been no threats to members of the British community in Grenada. Naturally there are always contingency arrangements to secure the well-being of British communities in every part of the world. These arrangements exist for this part as for elsewhere.