Object.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on trade union rights at GCHQ. [1158]

I announced on 15 May that we were fulfilling our long-standing commitment to restore to staff at GCHQ the freedom to join the independent trade union of their choice. Management and unions will shortly commence negotiations on a collective agreement to provide safeguards against disruption. GCHQ staff make a valuable contribution to protecting the liberties and freedoms of our country. They are now able to share fully in one of the important liberties that they defend.

Will the Foreign Secretary accept that millions of people, both here and abroad, will welcome his statement this afternoon? Does he agree with the sacked GCHQ workers that this was a wrong that was righted at long last? Does he accept that the ban on trade unions at GCHQ has done us profound damage abroad and that, while the ban continued, it was impossible for this country to lecture others on respect for human rights?

I am glad of the warm welcome that has been given to our announcement by many of the 14 members of staff who were dismissed because of their refusal to give up trade union activity. The Labour party has never accepted the vile slur on which the ban was based: that people cannot be patriotic and also loyal to a trade union. That was a slur not just on the GCHQ staff, but on millions of patriotic trade union members and I am glad that we have put that right.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it was a mistake for the national unions to call GCHQ workers out on strike? Will he name another country in the western world where people involved in signals intelligence were able either to join a union or to go on strike? Would he care to say whether he would like his staff overseas to be able to go on declaring around the world that this country is now virtually national-strike-free?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this country will continue to do its duty and will see that duty done by its staff abroad. We have seen an excellent example of the way in which Foreign Office staff work without regard to any consideration of rights and conditions in the way that our staff at Sierra Leone managed the magnificent evacuation of 2,000 people, which was done by only five people working around the clock. Therefore, the slur that the hon. Gentleman makes on Foreign Office staff is unacceptable.

I congratulate the Foreign Secretary on removing the ban on trade union rights for GCHQ staff.

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's congratulations.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the Government's policy on human rights. [1159]

We have made it clear that human rights will be a central element of this Government's foreign policy. As set out by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary in the mission statement of 12 May, we shall work through international forums and bilateral relationships to spread the values of human rights, civil liberties and democracy that we demand for ourselves.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment, and welcome the new emphasis that the Government are placing on promoting human rights around the world. I think that it will be strongly supported by the British people.

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind remarks. We appreciate the warm reception that the changed policy on human rights has received not just in this country, but throughout the world.

Would the Minister be sympathetic to the incorporation of the European convention on human rights into domestic law?

Yes, we would be sympathetic to that.

May I say how glad I am to see my hon. Friend and the rest of the foreign affairs team on the Front Bench, and how delighted we are that human rights has been put at the front of the Department's agenda?

We have serious concerns about human rights in Indonesia. One of the first actions of my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and my hon. Friend the Minister of State was to ask for an investigation of the events in Bandung and Jakarta.

I, too, welcome the Minister to his post. Does he agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the last Government were right to export Hawk aircraft to Indonesia?

I can only repeat that, while we make it clear that the human rights dimension is an important part of the way in which we shall consider applications for export licences, the review announced by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has not yet been completed, although it will be completed very rapidly. Until that time, it would be foolish for us to make any further comment.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about UK relations with China. [1160]

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the implications of the Government's human rights stance for trade relations with China. [1170]

China has emerged as a major power with a rapidly growing economy. That, in turn, will lead to internal change within Chinese society. We want to open a new chapter of more constructive relations with China across the board, addressing both trade and more difficult issues such as human rights. Transparency and the rule of law are important both on human rights grounds and as a basis for sound commercial relations.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. In the recent past, our European partners have had better relationships with China. Does my hon. Friend envisage any stumbling blocks in the future? Can the handover of Hong Kong become a bridge towards a better relationship with China, rather than the stumbling block that it has constituted in the past?

My hon. Friend is right to say that it is important to open a new chapter in our relations with China. We are all keen to make a success of the handover of Hong Kong, and to ensure that it constitutes a bridge between our two countries rather than a barrier; but, at the same time, we must address difficult and important issues with China. The human rights agenda will be important to us, and I can tell my hon. Friend that my right hon. Friend and I have already raised our concerns about human rights in our meetings with the ambassador.

Does the Minister agree that there is a balance between trade and human rights, and that, if he presses the human rights case too hard, we shall lose in trade? What are the implications of that for British jobs?

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that there is a balance, but it is not a question of either/or. We must be concerned about human rights, as we are concerned about developing trade, and we can use the opportunities of trade to expand the human rights agenda. I am a little surprised, however, that the right hon. Gentleman finds time to lecture the Government on their record of trade with China, when the previous Government did not pay much regard to the human rights agenda. Their trade performance with China was considerably worse than that of other countries, which gave much more priority to the human rights agenda.

I welcome my hon. Friend to his post and invite him to take no notice of lectures on human rights from the Conservatives, whose performance in office was an international scandal.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his opening comments and for the comments that he made about the right hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Sir A. Hamilton). I must say that it is a pleasure to see the right hon. Gentleman here, rather than carrying out his other duties as returning officer today, which I thought might be even more important to him.

Will the hon. Gentleman make certain that, in all Her Majesty's Government's dealings with China, the issue of Tibet is not forgotten and rolled under the carpet? Is it not the case that the systematic abuse of human rights and of the people of Tibet for very many years by the Chinese authorities has seriously prejudiced the view that people in the free world hold of the People's Republic of China, and that, in the long term, it must be detrimental to trading relations also unless the authorities do something to improve human rights in Tibet?

I share the hon. Gentleman's concerns. We also appreciate the important human rights agenda in relation to Tibet; the hon. Gentleman made those points with great force. In the meetings that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have had individually with the ambassador, the issue of human rights has been raised, and Tibet is on that agenda.

How will the Ministers assist the exports into the republic of the products of British Aerospace and Airbus Industrie, in Europe? Does my hon. Friend agree that aerospace is one of our biggest industries, using skilled labour, and that there is a huge market in the republic?

My hon. Friend is correct to point out the importance of raising our trade profile with China. As he knows from my earlier response, we have not performed as well in China as we have other countries, and there is a clear lesson to be learnt from the failures of the previous Government in that regard. We shall build up a much more positive relationship with China.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next plans to meet the Prime Minister of Israel to discuss the middle east peace process; and if he will make a statement. [1161]

When I visited the front-line peace process states, on 25 to 30 May, I was not able to meet Prime Minister Netanyahu, who was attending an urgent summit with President Mubarak. My visit reflected the high priority that we give to the search for a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the middle east, and the close contact that we maintain with the region's leaders. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs very much hopes to visit the region in the autumn.

I am grateful for that answer. Will the Minister join me in condemning the murder of three Palestinian land agents and the attempted murder of a fourth Palestinian land agent by fellow Palestinians? Is he aware that those murders have been tacitly encouraged by certain senior officers of the Palestine National Authority? Does he agree that that can be of no help to the peace process?

I can do better than join the hon. Gentleman in the points that he makes. I have already publicly condemned the actions and the events to which he refers, and I have already made it clear to the Palestine National Authority that, equally, it should condemn such activities. I have made the same point to the Authority in another way, by telling it that, although it has many friends in the United Kingdom who understand the Palestinians' case, it does not help that case by failing to condemn the type of activity mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

When he spoke to the Palestine National Authority, did my hon. Friend offer it the Government's support for its difficult work? However, did he also make it clear that there are significant concerns about the Authority's use of the public money that it is receiving from international sources, because of serious allegations that a significant proportion of that money is not being used appropriately?

I can assure my hon. Friend that I expressed those concerns publicly, and privately, in my meeting with Prime Minister Arafat. It is important to all public and private donors to the Palestinian Authority that all money is accounted for and that there is a clear rule of law in the administration of public funds. I have made those points clear, and, in the context of Palestine, I have said that our approach to human rights is not a la carte. We shall have universal principles, and we shall apply those in each and every circumstance.

If the Government are truly interested in promoting human rights, will the Minister confirm that, when he next meets the Israeli Prime Minister, he will tell him that the Government of Israel have done a great wrong and harm, as they continue to do, to the Palestinians? To move the peace process further and faster along. will the Minister assure the House that he will listen with care and attention to the views of our friends and allies in the Gulf, whose views on those matters are not always given the attention that they deserve?

I always felt that the hon. Gentleman would do better in opposition than in government, and his question shows that that is the case. We are keen to push forward the peace process, to ensure that we achieve a just and comprehensive peace that provides political integrity and prosperity for the Palestinians and security for the Israelis. We shall do all we can to ensure that we are an active player in that process.

I congratulate my hon. Friend not only on taking up his position as Minister with responsibility for middle east affairs but on his most recent visit to the area, which went down very well.

I am again grateful for the kind words from my hon. Friend, although I do not know how long the love-in between Ministers and Back Benchers will continue.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the future of the BBC World Service. [1163]

The BBC World Service makes a vital contribution to the promotion of Britain abroad. We want it to flourish and in doing so continue to build on its outstanding international reputation for objective news and comment. Through the Foreign Office and BBC World Service working group, we shall continue to ensure the maintenance of a special quality, style and ethos for the World Service's output.

I thank the Minister for his answer. Would he consider introducing the practice of providing the World Service with funding intentions for five years ahead so that it can improve its strategic planning ability? Will he reaffirm the Government's support for the World Service's intention to create programmes in foreign languages for areas it deems best served by television rather than by radio?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question, which gives me the opportunity to sing the praises of the BBC World Service. It is an important part of this country's diplomatic activities. It is clear, whatever country one visits in the world, that the reputation of the BBC and therefore of Britain is extremely high.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment to his post and I welcome his comments about the importance of the BBC World Service, not only because of its diplomatic importance, but because of the important cultural role it performs. As my hon. Friend will be aware, until fairly recently the World Service was subject to a three-year funding programme which gave it some opportunity to plan ahead and to take advantage of potential developments. Under the previous Administration, without consultation and unilaterally, that arrangement was withdrawn. The World Service now has to operate on the basis of annual funding which makes it difficult for it to fulfil its potential. Will my hon. Friend consider reviewing the basis of funding?

I can certainly assure my hon. Friend that any decisions taken about the BBC World Service's financial structure will follow detailed consultation with the BBC World Service. The detail and the outcome are, of course, subject to the Government's comprehensive spending review.

How much money has the Foreign Office given the BBC World Service in this financial year and how much will it give in the next two financial years?

I am slightly surprised by the hon. and learned Gentleman's question, because he raises an issue to which he clearly knows the answer. The rules are set out in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office annual report. I suggest that the hon. and learned Gentleman finds the Library; the information will be there and readily available to him. He will also find there the figures for the next two financial years. I said to the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames) that I thought that he would do well in opposition. One thing is certain; the hon. and learned Gentleman's performance in opposition will be no better than his performance in government; it will be equally bad.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the handover of Hong Kong to China. [1164]

A successful transition for Hong Kong is one of our highest priorities. We are committed to doing all that we can, working with the Government of China and the incoming Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, to secure Hong Kong's continuing stability, prosperity and freedoms through and beyond the handover, on the basis of the Joint Declaration.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to his position. Does he agree that Hong Kong's continued success will depend on the rule of law and on civil and political freedoms?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that the success of the Hong Kong economy depends very much on the rule of law and the liberties of Hong Kong, which are protected by the Joint Declaration until 2047. I can assure the House that the Government will continue to monitor the observance of those liberties and report on that to the House every six months. The Joint Liaison Group has a continuing role until 2000 monitoring the conduct of the Joint Declaration. We shall play a full part in that. We shall also work with our international allies to make sure that international interest continues to be shown in Hong Kong so that we fulfil our obligation to the people of Hong Kong that the handover terms are honoured in the years ahead.

I also congratulate the Foreign Secretary on his appointment.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that Britain's interest in Hong Kong must not end at midnight on 30 June. We shall have a strong continuing interest, both commercially and as one of the architects of the Joint Declaration, in making sure that its freedoms are observed. A Committee of the House may well serve a purpose, but that is essentially a matter for the House to resolve. I certainly intend to keep the House informed, and I hope that hon. Members will wish to participate in debates on the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Chinese authorities have announced their intention to dismiss some of those who were democratically elected in Hong Kong and carry popular support? Will he therefore convey to the Chinese authorities our strength of feeling on that issue and encourage our European Union partners and the United States to do so as well?

I can assure my hon. Friend that, in opposition, in government and in the House, I have roundly condemned the action of the Chinese Government in dismissing the elected Legislative Council of Hong Kong and their intention to replace it on 1 July with a Legislative Council appointed by a committee set up by Beijing. There is no way in which we can accept that as a proper implementation of the Joint Declaration or as demonstrating respect for the democratic choices of the people of Hong Kong. We shall continue to press that view. In the meantime, we attach particular importance to the commitment of the Chinese Government to hold free and fair elections for a new Legislative Council within 12 months, and we expect that commitment to be fulfilled.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with his European colleagues on the introduction of the social chapter into the United Kingdom. [1165]

Incorporation of the social chapter into the main EC treaty and its extension to the United Kingdom are being considered within the intergovernmental conference. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I have discussed the issue with a number of my European colleagues both in bilateral meetings and at IGC sessions.

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his post.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his initial kind remarks.

Is the Minister aware of the widespread astonishment in Europe that a national political party in Britain actually opposes the very limited rights laid down in the social chapter? Is he further aware that that astonishment is shared by my predecessor, the former Conservative Member for Broxstowe?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is interesting at European meetings when our partners ask why Britain failed to score any goals in the past. I am delighted to say that one could not expect anything else when they were not on the playing field in the first place.

The Minister signally failed to answer the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter). He has clearly forgotten that Labour proposed to sign the social chapter. If the proposal to extend the works council directive to firms of only 50 employees is carried by majority voting, will the Government implement the decision?

The Government are bound by European treaties. There is no question of a British Government not complying with treaties. Due to the positive climate in Europe, we are able to insist among our colleagues that there be a full examination of all the issues and principles involved and that British organisations, such as the Institute of Directors, be invited to give evidence. When we have heard that evidence, we will come to conclusions.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions Her Majesty's Government have had with representatives of the Pakistan and Indian Governments about the position in Kashmir. [1166]

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary discussed Kashmir with the Indian Prime Minister's envoy on 21 May. I intend to discuss the issue during visits to India and Pakistan later this week.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment. Would there be any better way in which to celebrate the 50th anniversary of independence for Pakistan and India than to resolve the long outstanding problem of Kashmir? Although the key to unlocking the problem is clearly in the hands of India, with a positive response from Pakistan, will my hon. Friend make it clear that the new British Government intend to take a much more positive attitude in trying to end this long-running problem?

My hon. Friend has taken a long and very keen interest in the issue of Kashmir and what is happening in Kashmir and to the people of Kashmir. He is absolutely right to say that a breakthrough in relations between India and Pakistan would be very appropriate in the 50th year of independence.

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to the Government Front Bench. Will he consider two initiatives that the United Kingdom could take? First, the Government could convene a conference between India and Pakistan under the provisions of the Simla agreement of 1972 and, with the agreement of both sides, chair that conference. Secondly, bearing in mind that the dispute is between Commonwealth states, will he consider finding a way of putting the problem of Kashmir on the agenda of the next conference of heads of state of Commonwealth countries?

We would very much encourage the talks between the Indian and Pakistan Governments. We see that as the most appropriate way in which to make progress. The framework for the talks has been provided by United Nations resolutions and the Simla agreement, but we would initially look to the parties themselves as the best way in which to get a lasting and just solution to the problems.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards Europe. [1167]

We believe that our membership of the European Union is vital to Britain's exports and jobs, improves the security of our continent and increases our clout in trade talks and world affairs. We are committed to developing a people's Europe that is more open to the citizens of Britain and the continent and more relevant to their concerns about jobs, crime and the environment. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made excellent progress towards that objective yesterday when he obtained agreement at Ecofin to boost jobs through improving employability, completing the single market and promoting economic growth.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his new position and thank him for his statement. Does he agree that last night's Division, in which the biggest pro-European vote ever was recorded in the House, is an overwhelming endorsement of the Government's new constructive approach and makes it much more likely that we will get an agreement in Amsterdam that is good for Britain and good for Europe?

As my hon. Friend will have observed, in our first month in office we have achieved our first objective in relations with the European Union, transforming the negotiating climate for Amsterdam. We shall go ready for some tough bargaining to secure hard gains for Britain. We have every prospect of achieving progress for Europe and a good deal for Britain, including a legal basis for our border controls, which was never obtained by the Conservatives.

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the mood of the country is not to sign up to any further erosion of sovereignty or any moves towards federalism? Does he agree with the Director General of the Confederation of British Industry, Mr. Adair Turner, that the only way to maintain our sovereignty is not to sign up to the social chapter and not to give away any more powers to qualified majority voting?

I am happy to say that I shall meet Mr. Adair Turner later this week, when I shall have an opportunity to explore his views. This Government are here as a result of the views of the British people who, every time they have been asked, have come out overwhelmingly in support of the social chapter. I find it depressing that, despite the result of the last election, which contributed to the outcome of last night's Division, the Conservatives seem to have learnt no lessons and not changed their tune, despite their overwhelming rejection by the British people.

I welcome my right hon. Friend and his colleagues to their Front-Bench positions. Now that the Prime Minister has put Great Britain at the heart of Europe, will he explain to our European partners that, if economic and monetary union is to succeed, it has to address the people's agenda of jobs and growth and that, if it does not address that agenda, regardless of whether it goes ahead on time, it cannot succeed?

I am pleased to say that my right hon. Friend said firmly in Sweden that what is important for the peoples of Europe is that we strengthen our economies, not necessarily that we integrate them. That is why we are opening up an agenda addressing the concerns of the people of Europe that will tackle the economy and growth and will focus on their worries about the environment and about organised crime, which knows no borders. If Europe switches to tackling the issues that affect the quality of life of the citizens of Europe, we can restore popular legitimacy for the European project.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm one issue on which there is a scintilla of doubt? Does it remain the Government's clear intention to introduce proportional representation in time for the 1999 elections to the European Parliament?

I am happy to repeat what I said during the month before the general election. It is our wish and intention to introduce a new electoral system based on lists and proportional representation for the next European elections. I said at the time that the timetable is very tight and that legislation will need to be carried through this winter if it is to happen. We are still examining whether that is possible, but we have certainly not ruled it out.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to his post. Will he confirm that the policy of this Government, as opposed to that of their predecessors, will be to work co-operatively—to build alliances rather than to seek inglorious isolation?

Glorious isolation did not prove a useful position from which to negotiate. We have demonstrated that by going to Europe in a spirit of partnership, seeking solutions to common problems. We get a much better hearing and a much better answer than if we go in a spirit of sterile, negative opposition, which the Conservatives chose. We go to Europe to do a deal, not to strike postures for a domestic audience as the Conservatives did.

The Foreign Secretary has rightly placed employment at the heart of the policy issues for the European Union. On behalf of the coastal communities of the United Kingdom, I ask him to respond more effectively to the points raised yesterday about quota hopping by my hon. Friend the Member for North Tayside (Mr. Swinney) and by the right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor).

The hon. Lady raises a serious and important point, and we have stressed that the issue of quota hopping and the economic future of our fishing communities is one of our high negotiating priorities for Amsterdam. We are hopeful that our discussions with the Commission will produce a package that we can confirm at Amsterdam and that will bring significant economic gains to those communities.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he plans to visit Washington to discuss UK-US relations. [1168]

I met Secretary of State Albright two weeks ago in Washington and we had a positive and full discussion on US-UK relations. Both sides of the House will want to welcome warmly the outstanding success of President Clinton's visit the other week.

Did my right hon. Friend raise with his American counterpart the need for substantial progress at the international environment summit in New York later this month? Will he also raise with her in the future the problem of toxic and radioactive pollution that was left in the United Kingdom in the bases used by the US military?

I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that I had a full discussion with Secretary of State Albright on environmental issues of international concern. We are both agreed that, in the next century, the environmental agenda will become much more prominent in international relations, and we look forward to working together at Denver to try to prepare statements on climate change that we can take to the summit in New York the subsequent week. The toxic contamination of US bases is primarily an issue for domestic Departments, but if they ask us for help, we will be pleased to raise the matter with the United States. When we go to international summits to call on other countries to meet the targets necessary to safeguard the global climate, it is important that we show an example in our back yard by ensuring that we have a healthy environment for our people.

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm to President Clinton when he visits him the importance and primacy of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and, in particular, American involvement in it? Will he confirm that nothing in his future policies in connection with a European defence policy, whether through the Western European Union or any other body, will water down the importance of NATO's role?

I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that we have repeatedly stressed to our American allies the importance we attach to NATO. We have worked closely with the Americans in the North Atlantic Council, and will work closely with them on the preparations for the Madrid summit on enlargement. We hope that we will be able to prevent text at the Amsterdam summit that commits us to a merger of the WEU with the European Union. We can see a useful role for the WEU in providing help with peacekeeping and humanitarian missions: we do not see it as a vehicle for the collective defence of western Europe.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his talks with Guido di Talla on the future of the Falklands-Malvinas. [1171]

My right hon. Friend is finalising the details of proposals for an early meeting at which he intends to discuss matters with the Argentine Foreign Minister to improve our already good relations with that country.

What will we say about the problem of greedy over-fishing in the south Atlantic?

My hon. Friend will know that it was the policy of the previous Government—as it is of this one—to obtain a fisheries agreement with Argentina. We will certainly raise the issue with the Foreign Minister when he visits London and we will ensure that the Argentines understand that we place a high priority on obtaining such an agreement, which would help conserve stocks, which is in the interests of those who fish from the islands and from Argentina.

In view of recent unhelpful comments from Buenos Aires about the expectations that the Argentine Government have of the new Labour Government, will the Minister take this opportunity to make it clear that there has been no change in policy on the sovereignty of the Falklands from that of the previous Government?

My answer is a firm yes to that question.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the measures taken in his Department in co-operation with the Department of Trade and Industry to promote Britain's export trade. [1172]

The Foreign Office works hand in hand with the Department of Trade and Industry on export promotion. Together, we have established a new export forum which will consider how to improve our export promotion initiatives.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, among France, Germany, Italy and ourselves, Britain is the only country to have experienced a fall in its share of exports to the tiger economies and in its share of total world exports?

My hon. Friend makes her point tellingly—[Laughter.] I thought that it was superbly researched. It is precisely because of the factors that she described that we made promoting exports and boosting jobs high priorities in our Foreign Office mission statement. I am currently exploring with Lord Simon at the Department of Trade and Industry how we can increase the exchange between business and the Foreign Office to ensure that, both abroad and at home, we have business expertise. I hope to make an announcement before the House rises for the summer on increasing the number of business men on short-term secondments at our posts abroad.

The right hon. Gentleman knows that, excluding Japan, we export more per head of population than any other country in the world. It is, of course, good news that the Foreign Office still intends to promote exports, but how does the right hon. Gentleman intend to reconcile, in many markets, our need to promote exports with the much higher profile to be given to promoting human rights?

Of course the hon. Gentleman is right to say that, historically, back into the previous century, Britain has exported a much higher proportion of GDP than many other nations. We have been living off that inheritance, and over the past 10 years the growth in our exports has not been as fast as that of our competitor nations, which have proved more competitive.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a good sales pitch to have a good human rights record? In the course of his duties, will he do an audit—a proper assessment—of best practice in our outposts around the world? Many of us have experience of our embassies. Some of them in some countries are absolutely excellent, but others are not. I hesitate to name names, but I will mention Berlin, where our embassy is difficult to contact and is hardly ever open to British business men. I hope that we can examine best practice and try to spread it.

I hope that our embassy in Berlin will be open in time for the transfer of government. It will be a prestigious building—one of the prime architectural designs of the century. [Interruption.] My hon. Friend made a serious point. He raised an important issue for the many millions of people who work in British exporting industries and made the important point that there may be good practice that succeeds in some embassies which we need to transfer to others. That is one of the reasons we are anxious to take more business men with expertise in the export industries to some of those embassies. They will bring a culture of business application, and share with the diplomats who will remain behind after they have gone the knowledge of what business needs from our posts abroad, so that it can be provided better.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his Department's policy in respect of freedom of religious practice and expression. [1173]

We are strongly opposed to religious intolerance and discrimination in any form. The Government are committed to the principles enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights, the international covenant on civil and political rights, the European convention on human rights and the declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief.

I thank the Minister for that response. Does he agree that, where there is intolerance in religious practice, whether in Israel, Saudi Arabia or elsewhere, we shall oppose it, because when people come to this country we allow complete freedom of religious practice and expression—which also includes the right to change?

I endorse the hon. Gentleman's remarks. We extend freedom of religion to all who seek refuge within these shores. We continue to raise questions of religious intolerance with those who practise it in their countries—and will continue to do just that.

What pressure can my hon. Friend bring to bear on the Iranian regime to lift the fatwa against Salman Rushdie?

That is an important question. While we view the election of a new Iranian president with interest, it must be made clear to Iran that any improvement in relations between Britain and Iran will depend greatly on the lifting of the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, who is after all a British citizen. Indeed, it is outrageous that the fatwa was issued against him in the first place.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the role of the European Parliament. [1174]

We look forward to a close and fruitful relationship with the European Parliament, which has an important legislative function in the EC, particularly in areas that are subject to majority voting in the Council of Ministers.

In the c oming intergovernmental conference, will the hon. Gentleman resist any extension of powers of co-decision for the European Parliament?

As the hon. Gentleman will be aware from his research background, there are already some such powers. Where there is any extension of qualified majority voting, in many instances we shall be looking for an extension of co-decision.

Why do we not take the high ground in the European Union and argue for fully democratic institutions—including the European Parliament, which should be the fulcrum of democratic activity?

I agree with my hon. Friend that there is a democratic deficit in Europe, partly caused by the Conservative party's inability to elect Members to the European Parliament, so the Conservatives' view is never put. We would welcome an enhanced democratic process in Europe, which is why, in the IGC negotiations, we emphasise the need to extend co-decision in areas of qualified majority voting.

Does the Minister acknowledge that there is great lack of understanding between Members of this House and Members of the European Parliament? If we are to improve our relationships and thereby underpin the democratic process, what is the Government's view of the plan for greater co-operation between Members of this House and of the European Parliament? Surely that would help us to understand one another much better.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is certainly important that the European Parliament liaises closely with national Parliaments. One reason why, during the IGC negotiations, we have strongly supported moves to improve transparency is to make information more widely available and to enable sensible dialogue to take place between the European Parliament and national Parliaments.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the proposals for the handover ceremony in Hong Kong. [1177]

The joint handover ceremony between Britain and China in the grand foyer of the new extension to the Hong Kong convention and exhibition centre will begin at about 23.30 hours Hong Kong time on Monday 30 June. The ceremony will be attended by up to 4,000 invited guests, including His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and me.

In the light of earlier discussion of this issue, will the Government take the opportunity provided by the handover ceremony to discuss with other Governments represented there the importance of a continuing close interest in the affairs of Hong Kong after the ceremony is over?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the United Kingdom will have a continuing interest in Hong Kong. We have an interest under the joint declaration and through the work of the joint liaison group. We have an economic interest in Hong Kong's continuing success, and a moral and political interest in maintaining human rights and democratic freedoms. The United Kingdom will continue to be an active partner in Hong Kong's future.

Will the Minister clarify whether the Prime Minister will be attending?

The right hon. Gentleman will know that no decision has yet been taken on my right hon. Friend's attendance. When a decision is made, he will be among the first to be told.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the arrangements for the Commonwealth summit in Edinburgh. [1178]

Arrangements for the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Edinburgh in October are progressing well. We are working closely with the Commonwealth Secretariat, the Scottish Office and local police authorities in Scotland to ensure a successful meeting, which will serve the Government's aim of strengthening the Commonwealth.

If the Government's plans for a Scottish Parliament reach fruition, what role would the Minister see for it in future summits?

The question of a Scottish Parliament does not as far as I am aware arise in this context; nor will it be on the agenda for the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Edinburgh. I can, however, assure the hon. Gentleman that the meeting will be a successful advertisement both for the Commonwealth and for Edinburgh and the whole of Scotland.

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would like to give the Minister for Europe the opportunity to withdraw his remark that it is impossible for Conservatives to elect Members of the European Parliament. I am living proof that that is not the case.

That is barely a point of order. I am aware of the hon. Lady's status, and I recommend the use of Vacher Dod. I think that the Minister should have something to say on that. He should not be churlish in respect of lady Members.

I am grateful, Madam Speaker. I think that I may inadvertently have said impossible; I meant nearly impossible.