asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made by Her Majesty's Government to the Government of Argentina to ensure that British interests in companies whose assets have been taken over by the Argentine Government are fairly compensated; and what replies have been received.

The attention of the Argentine authorities has been drawn on a number of occasions since 1970 to the interests of British debenture holders in Buenos Aires Lacroze Tramways, an Argentine company claiming compensation for the nationalisation of its assets. Her Majesty's Embassy was given an oral undertaking in 1971 that the case would be looked into.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the Argentine Government's refusal to negotiate a fair settlement in the Buenos Aires Lacroze Tramway case, where the assets of British investors have been expropriated without any compensation, is a disgrace and is causing harm to the Argentine Government's creditworthiness and good will? Will my hon. Friend make further representations?

My hon. Friend will realise that the Lacroze Tramways is an Argentine company, although the debenture holders are British, and therefore it is difficult to make representation in international law. He will also bear in mind that there is a case before the Argentine courts at present which has yet to be decided.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Smith régime about the conditions of detention of political opponents of the régime.

Before and during the test of acceptability we made many representations about the detainees. Whilst there is no settlement it is very difficult to obtain any improvements for them. But we shall be prepared to renew our appeals on behalf of those who were detained during the test of acceptability.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of these detainees have been held in custody without trial for up to seven years and that the conditions of detention are only one more example of the erosion of civil liberties in Rhodesia? Is he further aware that his continued protestations that there is really not much that he can do gives fuel to those who argue that the only solution in the Rhodesian situation is violence? Is that the future that he wants for Rhodesia?

We did our best for all the detainees during the negotiations last year. Now that the proposals have been rejected there is no basis on which we can effectively intervene. Nonetheless, I undertook in the House the other day to make certain representations. These will be made as soon as my inquiries are complete.

While appreciating my right hon. Friend's concern, may I ask whether it is not the case that the number of political opponents now in detention is rather small? Will he tell us the number and state how it compares with the figure, for example, under Sir Edgar Whitehead?

The number is smaller than during the period that my hon. Friend has mentioned. As a result of negotiations last year, 54 detainees were released, but I cannot give my hon. Friend the exact number of those at present in detention. Approximately 65 would be the right figure.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for undertaking to make further representations, but will he tell us how they will be made? Are they to be made orally?—we have no representatives there now, I believe—or in writing? Will he publish what he does? Even though—as my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Robert Hughes) says—the Government seem to take the view that there is nothing much they can do, is it not important that we should be seen to be making representations on behalf of these people, for whom we still have legal responsibility, especially as, quite rightly, we make representations to the Government of the USSR about the conditions of the Jews there, for whom we have far less responsibility?

As I have said, as soon as I have completed the inquiries that I have been making about certain of the detainees I hope to take action. Perhaps it can be left to me for the moment to decide what would be the appropriate action. I appreciate the general point made by the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan). The people of Rhodesia must be well aware by now of the deep concern felt in the House about the situation facing the detainees, and the representations that I shall be making will, I hope, underline this fact. I hope that my representations will be given appropriate and due weight by those at present in power in Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps Her Majesty's Government is taking with the European Economic Community countries to ensure that they co-operate in the policy of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia.

Our views on sanctions are well known to members of the European Economic Community. The application of Security Council Resolutions by member States is a matter between the States concerned and the United Nations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people—some of whom, unlike me, are in favour of Britain's joining the Common Market—are appalled that this Government have not put more pressure on our prospective European partners who are among the biggest sanctions breakers? Will he raise this matter and will he also agree to read or get his right hon. Friend to read the recent document produced by the Africa Bureau called "Total Sanctions or Total Economic Warfare?" which lists 58 ways in which sanctions can be tightened up, including applications to EEC countries?

I will draw my right hon. Friend's attention to the publication. I emphasise to the hon. Lady that in ensuring that the provisions of the sanctions are carried out the efforts of the Government are directed towards the United Nations and not normally through the European Economic Community, though nothing prevents these matters being discussed within the Community.

If the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Miss Lestor) is right that the countries of the European Community are breaking sanctions, should not Her Majesty's Government have made it a condition precedent that we would not deposit the ratification until they had ceased doing so?

No, I do not really think that we should. My right hon. Friend on a previous occasion has made well known to the House the efforts that the Government have undertaken to bring to bear the objections they have to the degree to which sanctions are being breached. But I repeat that action has to be taken through the United Nations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply has greatly surprised hon. Members on both sides? Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that in his view this is either not a proper matter to be discussed between ourselves and our future partners in Europe or that it makes no difference and that these matters could be dealt with equally well from outside?

Clearly the right hon. Gentleman did not hear what I said. I said that these and other matters were perfectly within the range of discussion with other members of the EEC.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that this would be a suitable matter for discussion by the European Parliament in Strasbourg?

Fortunately it is not for me to state what should be the business of the European Parliament.

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

The United States Government themselves brought to the attention of the United Nations their decision to resume importing Rhodesian chrome ore.

Whilst appreciating that Her Majesty's Government have little, if any, influence over the United States Government concerning their imports of chrome from Rhodesia, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that a large part of those imports of chrome ore from Rhodesia to the United States are being carried in British ships and that all these cargoes are being insured with Lloyds of London? Is not that a matter on which he has power to intervene and, that being so, ought he not to do so?

We are investigating all allegations of this kind which reach us.

It is not an allegation; it is a fact.

As far as I know, it is an allegation. We are investigating these matters. As the previous Administration were sufficiently misguided to place the whole question of sanctions in the lap of the United Nations, their subsequent supporters must understand it if we leave the matter to be determined between the United States and the United Nations.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his discussions with the Chinese Government on the exchange of students between Great Britain and China.

During my right hon. Friend's recent visit, the Chinese Government confirmed that they would like to send up to 200 students to Britain within the next year to study English.

Since the Chinese Vice-Minister said last week that it was hoped to receive British students to China in the second part of next year, may I ask the Minister what discussions he is having with the Chinese authorities on how the students are to be selected? Are they to be 17-year-olds or 18-year-olds, or post-graduates? What considerations will be taken into account?

We have not yet received any advice from the Chinese authorities that they are prepared to receive British students. We cannot say exactly how the arrangement will be handled till we do. I think the normal way would be through the British Council machinery, which will proceed, as it does now in many other countries, with selection.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his recent official visit to China.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement following his recent official visit to China.

My right hon. Friend visited China from 29th October to 2nd November.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the whole House will be gratified by the improved relations between the United Kingdom and China? Is he able to say what are the prospects that trade with China will be increased as a result of the visit? Can he give reasons why the Chinese Government support British entry into the Common Market?

The hon. Gentleman will not be surprised if, as a former Minister of Aviation, I welcome the decision of the Chinese Government to buy 20 Trident aircraft—the first of which is now on its way to China—and three Concorde aircraft, and to show an interest in buying the VC10, which, I hope. will restart this important production line, which has been sadly neglected.

Was the subject of Hong Kong mentioned?

There were naturally discussions about relations over Hong Kong in particular and about the resumption of rail communications and flights from Hong Kong to China.

We all welcome the Minister's statement about trade, but is he aware that while the Foreign Secretary was away it was officially announced that the Deputy Prime Minister, or Deputy Minister of Trade, or both, wanted to come here last August to discuss trade, but were told not to come because no one at the Foreign Office or at the Department of Trade and Industry would be able to meet them, because they were all on holiday? Will he see whether that is true and, if it is not, deny it? If it is, will he see that when people wish to come here on an official visit there is someone to receive them?

I was not at the Foreign Office at the time. I am not sure whether full ambassadorial relationships had been re-established at the time. We had had diplomatic relations for many years, but not. I think, ambassadorial relationships at that time. I am glad to say that I was happy to receive and to spend two hours in discussion with and to entertain to lunch the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, who is, I suppose, my opposite number in the Chinese Government.

The statement about aircraft is extremely valuable, but will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the market for capital goods and equipment in China is vastly greater than the relatively small segment applicable to aircraft? What did the Foreign Secretary discuss about the supply of capital equipment generally?

When in Peking my right hon. Friend took the opportunity to draw the attention of the Chinese Government to our ability to help contribute to the supply of sophisticated engineering, electronic and other equipment.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us where the Foreign Secretary is visiting today, and will he represent to him that we should very much welcome his presence in the House for an early debate on foreign affairs?

My right hon. Friend is in The Hague today, and he will be returning tomorrow. He very much regrets missing Questions in the House. The difficulty is that Monday is now the day both for Questions to my right hon. Friend and for meetings of the Council of Ministers of the Community. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary has already been in touch with the usual channels to see whether arrangements can be made to avoid a recurrence of this difficulty and therefore to make Foreign Office Questions later in the week, which may be convenient and attractive to those interested in these problems.

That sprat seems to have caught a rather large mackeral. Is the Minister aware that most of us find Mondays perfectly satisfactory and that the Foreign Secretary should fulfil his duty to the House and answer Questions here on the day when they are down to him?

I am not sure that the occupation of the Opposition benches fully endorsed the right hon. Gentleman's point of view. These matters are being discussed through the usual channels. As for the right hon. Gentleman's remarks concerning a foreign affairs debate, it is not for me to pre-empt the decision of the Leader of the House, but I will make sure that those remarks are conveyed to him.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will seek to arrange a meeting with the Prime Minister of Israel.

My right hon. Friend has no plans at present to meet the Prime Minister of Israel.

There are demands in certain quarters that the enlarged European Community should mediate between Israel and the Arab States. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we have reached the point where direct talks between Israel and its Arab neighbours is essential and that for Western Europe to try to mediate merely postpones the day when talks should begin, and that that denies us a major European interest, which is direct talks between the parties in dispute?

My hon. Friend is correct in that direct talks between the parties in dispute would be most desirable. In so far as the EEC—the Nine—are concerned, they share the common desire to achieve a peaceful settlement on the basis of the Security Council Resolution No. 242. They are not at present contemplating any initiative to promote negotiations, although I am sure they will do all they can to assist. We cannot ignore the fact that one of the parties in the dispute has clearly stated the need for an intermediary. Ideally, this should be Dr. Jarring.

When the Government next communicate with the Prime Minister of Israel will they note the happy news of the celebration of Israel's 25th anniversary in May, and will this country be represented by a member of the Royal Family—since in the last 25 years members of the Royal Family have, quite rightly, on many occasions visited Arab countries, but so far no member of the Royal Family has yet visited the State of Israel?

We will certainly bear the suggestion in mind.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that only a few days ago I returned from Israel after leading a delegation of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, as its President, and that I have seen Mrs. Meier, the Prime Minister, Mr. Yigal Allow the Deputy Prime Minister, and Abba Eban, the Foreign Minister? Will my right hon. Friend take note of their urgent and genuine desire to meet their Arab neighbours round the negotiating table as the only way of achieving a lasting settlement in the Middle East? Will he use his best efforts with the Arab countries to urge them to come into such negotiations, and make the same representations to our new partners in the wider European Economic Community?

I am indeed aware that my hon. Friend made a most valuable visit to Israel, and I am looking forward to discussing the matter in detail with him. As he says, the participants to the dispute must come together before a long-term solution can be reached.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on Anglo-Australian relations.

Our relations with Australia remain as always very good and close.

On this festival day of loyalty should we not be assured that our fellow subjects from Australia, Canada and New Zealand will be treated here as members of one family, on the basis of reciprocity? Will the Government take note that there are those on these benches who will be unable to support regulations which are laid which are conducive to estrangement, separatism and republicanism?

If my hon. Friend is referring to reports in the British and Australian Press that Australians coming here will be regarded as aliens I can assure him that this will not be the case. They will continue, as at present, to enjoy full civic rights, including the right to vote, the right to stand for public office, and the right to join the police and the armed forces. There is nothing in the new immigration rules to make it more difficult for Australians or New Zealanders or Canadians to come here, or to make them less welcome. Ordinary visitors and working holidaymakers, who together account for over 99 per cent. of Australians—and, I believe, New Zealanders—coming here, will not be affected by the new rules. Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians who come here to work permanently will in future need work permits instead of the old employment vouchers. They will not find it is any harder to get these than heretofore; it may even be easier. The House will be discussing the entire problem on Wednesday. I hesitate to say more now, and will leave it to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary then.

Is the Minister aware that that very long reply is also very misleading, and that it fails to deal with the real nub of the question? May I repeat to him a question that I put to the Foreign Secretary some time ago, arising out of a document published by the Labour Party on this whole question many months ago? Is he aware that it is the considered conclusion of most people who have studied this subject that the British Nationality Act, 1948, is hopelessly out of date, and that it was a great pity that the Government failed to put it right when the new Bill was introduced in 1971? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider seriously, before Wednesday, the proposition which the Labour Party has made that there should be the appointment of a Governmental inquiry into all aspects of citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies, to be accompanied or followed by an inquiry into Commonwealth citizenship conducted through the Commonwealth Secretariat? Is he aware that if he does not do this he will be under continuing difficulties about differences in treatment between Commonwealth entrants into this country, Europeans who come to this country, and others?

Of course, no one in this House would ignore the difficulties that we face, or could fail to be concerned about them. I would not, however, wish to anticipate what my right hon. Friend will say on Wednesday.

Is the Minister aware that he will have to do very much better than this on Wednesday if the Government are to receive the support that they require? Will he also bear in mind, with regard to the intervention by the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) that if the Labour Party, aided by a couple of misguided Conservatives, had not voted the way they did in Committee last year on the Immigration Bill this problem would never have arisen?

I should say that I, personally, shall not be taking part in the debate on Wednesday, but I will see that my hon. Friend's views are conveyed to my right hon. Friend.

May I assure the right hon. Gentleman that his statement that it may be easier for the Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians to come here will be widely welcomed not only in this House but in the country as a whole, and in those countries, too—but will he, in view of the fact that he has said this, make it abundantly clear in the legislation? Is he aware that there is increasing resentment in those countries, and that they are seriously considering whether they will be able to give to people who wish to emigrate from Britain to those countries the same facilities that they have previously had?

I take the point. I am not sure whether a legislative or administrative answer is required, but I will certainly look into what the hon. Gentleman has said.

On a point of order. I beg to give notice that in view of the unsatisfactory nature of those replies, I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made to him and by which Embassies in London as to the inadequacy of police protection in Great Britain; and what action he is taking in the matter.

As has been made public, I have received representations from the Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt and from other diplomatic missions in London about their security but I do not consider that it would be in the interest of those missions to reveal details, either of the representations or of the action taken as a result. I am in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary about police protection of diplomatic missions in this country.

Does not my hon. Friend find it interesting that the missions that are making these representations are those providing immunity for those who are mounting offensives in this country by letter bombs and in other ways? Does he not think that we should look with care at the question of allowing them to arm themselves and their subjects in this country, and thereby to act against the normal procedure of relying on our police protection?

I have no information that would lead me to suppose that my hon. Friend's allegation is correct, but we are nevertheless bound by the Vienna Convention of 1961 to give diplomatic missions in our country the protection they require.

Is it true that members of these missions are carrying sub-machine guns?

Not to our knowledge, but if it were to come to our knowledge we would take a serious view of it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what policy he will adopt at the International Law of the Sea Conference over the width of the territorial sea.

Her Majesty's Government have said that we are prepared to support extensions of territorial seas to a maximum of 12 miles, on condition that a satisfactory solution is reached to certain other related problems, such as passage through straits.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that it would be advantageous, in terms of controlling, protecting and developing our own continental shelf, if we were to exercise wider limits beyond the 12 miles in relation to waters overlying this area?

That is one of the questions that we shall be considering in the various forthcoming conferences. These will deal with questions connected with fisheries and the continental shelf, and seabed jurisdiction. These are complicated questions and we have not yet decided whether it would be to our advantage to alter the present rules.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Government of Norway have said that at the International Law of the Sea Conference they will be proposing an extension of the fishing limits to 15 miles? In view of the importance of the Norwegian fishing grounds to British boats, will the Minister undertake to have early and continuing discussions with the Norwegian Government so that a common policy may be adopted?

Yes, Sir. The hon. Gentleman will know that we cannot accept extensive fisheries jurisdiction by a coastal State outside the 12-mile limit, although we are prepared to consider a provision for some degree of coastal State preference in certain areas of the high seas.

Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the subject of the jurisdiction of the seabed will be considered together with the subject of the width of the territorial sea?

Yes, Sir. That is one of the problems that the conference will be considering.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on recent talks his Department have had with the countries of the European Economic Community on the preservation of the British fishing grounds.

International discussion on fisheries conservation is conducted through the regional fisheries commissions for the North Atlantic, of which the United Kingdom is a member. We have, however, discussed with the Federal German Government and other members of the European Economic Community the problems arising in relation to fishing on the high seas off Iceland.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we are to preserve the stocks of herring in the North Sea, we must have further negotiations with the Dutch, whose practice of industrial fishing is undoing the good work done industrial fishing to other EEC countries? years? Is this not a matter for the EEC and nobody else, and will my right hon. Friend take steps to stop the spread of industrial fishing to other EEC countries?

Certainly this and other matters affecting fishing come within the matters which can be discussed with our partners in the Community. I take due note of the matter raised by my hon. Friend, and will certainly consider it.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply is far from satisfactory, in view of the great difficulties which faced Conservative Members when the whole question of fishing jurisdiction in the EEC was raised during consideraiton of the European Communities Bill? Is it not true that we have only a ten-year delegation for our fishing around our shores? Surely something should now be done to see that our fishermen's rights are adequately protected.

The matter of the rights of individual members of the Community at the time when the transitional period comes to an end will be a matter for further discussion within the Community. It is right to say that the arrangements which were achieved by my right hon. Friend of the former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster were on the whole extremely well received and very favourable.

Is it not vital that we achieve international agreement to govern these fishing limits, including the Icelandic dispute?

This is within the framework of my main answer, namely that these arc matters for discussion through the regional fishery commissions of the North Atlantic.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether it is his intention to treat the agreements reached in Paris at the Summit Meeting on 19th and 20th October, and recorded in the communiqué issued on 21st October, as international agreements within the meaning of Section 1(4) of the European Communities Act.

No, Sir, the communiqué is not a treaty within the meaning of Section 1 of the European Communities Act, 1972.

Then will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that these agreements have no automatic legislative effect in this country? Will he also explain how, in the absence of a parliamentary Question, Parliament and the courts would have been expected to know this one way or the other?

It has never been suggested that the communiqué, which was the result of the Summit meeting in Paris, should be regarded as a legislative instrument for the purposes of this country. A legislative instrument is one passed by an Act of Parliament. This has not been. This is not really an appropriate question.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a number of other such communiqués have been expressly recognised as treaties for the purpose of the Act? What is the difference between those and this one?

I realise that a considerable number of individual instruments have been recognised, and were amongst those included in the annex to the White Paper to be treated as being within Section 1 of the Act. That is well known. But it has always been made clear by my right hon. and learned Friend the former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster that in that annex there were instruments which were not treaties and which could not be so regarded.

The right hon. Gentleman really must turn his mind to this question. We have had enough evasion. The last communiqué to come out of the previous Summit at The Hague was listed among the related treaties in the Appendix to the Treaty of Accession. I know because the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor told me that it is not regarded as a Community treaty. But what the whole country wishes to know is which of the various listed documents in that appendix are treaties and which are not. One must ask the right hon. Gentleman to make that information plain.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware—indeed, he has written to me on this subject and I regret any delay in replying, but I have replied to him today—that defining precisely which instruments listed in the annex are to be regarded as treaties has been a matter of considerable discussion both through the office of the council and with the commission. There still remains a restricted area of doubt about certain instruments which I cannot clarify.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply I beg leave to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his estimate, from information available from international sources, of the acreage of crops grown suitable for the manufacture of heroin and morphine in each of the major producing countries, and of the amounts of heroin and morphine produced by these countries; and how these compare with the world's needs for legal use.

The figures in tons for lawful use in 1970 are opium 1,370 tons, morphine 177 tons, heroin 111 kgs. An estimated minimum of 1,000 tons of opium were produced illicitly. Details are to be found in the International Narcotics Board Report, which is in the Library of the House.

In view of that very serious answer, for which I am grateful, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he is aware that each ton of opium illicitly produced can itself provide over 200 lb. of heroin, and that trade on this scale represents a very serious threat to the Western World? In view of the improved relations with China, will he now take up this question with the Chinese Government, and with other Governments whose nations are involved in this illegal production and traffic?

We realise that this is a very serious problem—although it is not so serious a problem in this country as in others. We participate fully in United Nations deliberations on the subject and we are contributors to the United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend about the seriousness of the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what particular rôle he and other Ministers in his Department will play in the Fanfare for Europe activities.

Arrangements are not yet complete, but it is likely that I and all Ministers in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, will be attending events in the Fanfare for Europe programme.

I hope that they enjoy themselves. Does my right hon. Friend think that at a time when this House is engaged in considering the Counter-Inflation (Temporary Provisions) Bill it is wise to spend £350,000 of public money on celebrating an event which in itself is admitted in the White Paper to be inflationary? Will he think again about this matter?

No, I do not feel inclined to think again. The amount of money to which my hon. Friend has referred is only part of the total amount that is being expended. The rest is being found largely by private bodies. Moreover, it is right to remember that this country, with its enormous stake in the whole cultural heritage of Europe and the world, could hardly celebrate more aptly its membership of the Community than in the way we are planning to do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in a modern dictionary "fanfare" has been described as "a public relations exercise for a non-event"?

No, Sir. Clearly the hon. Gentleman and I do not read the same dictionaries.

Since the policy of the Labour Party is opposed to entry on the current terms, does the right hon. Gentleman really expect the Labour-controlled local authorities which are now being invited to participate to blow a fanfare, or to blow something else?

I very much hope that all concerned will take this great event in the spirit in which this country should embark on its membership of the Community—that is, not in a petty spirit of continuing criticism and bickering but in a sense of our regarding this as a real opportunity.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that as this event will take place in the middle of the freeze it might be thought that because the Government cannot give the people bread they are giving them circuses?

No, it is not taking quite that form; nor is it intended to distribute brioches.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will seek to make an official visit to Libya.

My right hon. Friend has no plans at present to make an official visit to Libya.

In further communications with the Libyan Government will the right hon. Gentleman tell them that all British arms supplies to them will cease until such time as the Libyan Government abandon their publicly-stated policy of being a haven for known murderers and hijackers? Will the noble Lord also take this opportunity of dissociating Her Majesty's Government from the cynical view which may be held in some quarters that Libyan oil is a fair exchange for innocent lives?

I do not think that the suggestions made by the hon. Gentleman will have any influence on the policy of Libya.

May we be sure that no arms will be transferred to Libya of a kind which Colonel Gadafi might transfer to his friends in the IRA?

Any arms sold to Libya will include provision to ensure that they were not transferred to the IRA.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether, following his recent official visit to the People's Republic of China, he will continue to consult with the Chinese Government over policies towards the Indo/Pakistan subcontinent.

As I told the House earlier today, my right hon. Friend had useful discussions with the Chinese Government. We shall continue to keep in touch with the Chinese and we have since had discussions in London with the Chinese Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs on a number of subjects, including those of the sub-continent.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there are two issues of a humanitarian nature which could affect the long-term stability of the subcontinent? The first is the question of legal representation to those detained or awaiting political trial in Bangladesh, and in particular the denial of the right of access to a British Q.C. to represent the former Governor of East Pakistan? Secondly, will my right hon. Friend concert action with the Chinese to press the Indian Government to release over 90,000 Pakistani prisoners of war who have been kept in captivity for some 11 months since the conclusion of hostilities?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate the realities of the situation and will no doubt agree that the two matters which he raised must, in the end, be decided by the parties concerned. We recognise the importance of the points which he has raised and I shall make sure that my right hon. Friend is apprised of them when he returns from The Hague.

What was said in the discussions about BOAC's entry into Shanghai or Peking from Delhi or Calcutta?

We informed the Chinese Government that we hope to arrive at an air traffic agreement and that we also hope to present them with a draft in the next few weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the latest developments in the departure of Asian United Kingdom passport holders from Uganda.

All Asian United Kingdom passport holders have now left Uganda except for a small number who were exempt from President Amin's expulsion order.

Will my right hon. Friend make it clear beyond any doubt that the Asians have come to this country not only for reasons of common humanity on the part of Her Majesty's Government but as the result of a clear international obligation?

My hon. Friend is quite correct. I know that my hon. Friend also has a very special problem in his constituency. I can inform the House that is the intention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to make a statement on our general relations with Uganda before too long.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the deep anger felt in the City of Leicester at the Government's total failure to help the city to cope with the current influx of Asian refugees? Will he convey to his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State the deep concern and anxiety of my constituents?

The resettlement of Asian refugees from Uganda is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department. I will convey to him the point that the hon. Gentleman makes.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on what date Her Majesty's Government gave the agrément for the new Ambassador of the Republic of South Africa to the Court of St. James.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many representations he has received from hon. Members about his approval of the appointment of a new ambassador from South Africa to the United Kingdom.

Two hon. Members have made representation on behalf of constituents, about Dr. de Wet's appointment, approval for which was, on my right hon. Friend's recommendation, given by Her Majesty The Queen on 7th July.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that there is always discretion in every Government as to who will be accepted as an ambassador to the Court of St. James? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that two months ago Dr. de Wet was dropped from the Cabinet of Dr. Vorster partly because he was involved in commercial undertakings in respect of which a private criminal prosecution might be brought against him? We know that this Government will go to great limits to curry favour with South Africa, but is there no limit to the extent to which we will go to allow this country to become a dumping ground for those persons who are a political embarrassment to South Africa? Have we no self-respect left?

I reject completely the hypothesis on which the right hon. Gentleman has put that question. I understand that Dr. de Wet has denied the allegations. Beyond that it would not be appropriate to comment.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that no British Government curry favour with a Government abroad?

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend is quite correct.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Dr. de Wet has been a bitter critic of an ex-Prime Minister of this country—

So has Cecil King.

—Mr. Harold Macmillan—and has also made very bitter criticisms of the BBC, as I have no doubt Mr. Cecil King has? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, further, that Dr. de Wet has said that the existing law in South Africa dealing with sabotage—which allows people to be condemned to death—is too mild? How can such a person be regarded as a fit ambassador to the Court of St. James?

I understand that Dr. de Wet is alleged to have made some statement about the Labour Party before he last served as South African ambassador in London from 1964 to 1967. Those years were under a Labour Administration. I am sure that he has sufficient experience to know what is appropriate as a diplomatic representative in another country.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will seek to pay an official visit to Turkey.

My right hon. Friend has no present plans to do so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of growing consternation in this country at news of the erosion of democracy in a friendly country, at reports of as many as 4,000 political prisoners from trade union, academic and journalistic backgrounds, and at accusations of torture being used by the regime? No one under-estimates the extremist pressures which have been put on the Turkish Government recently, but will Her Majesty's Government represent to our Turkish allies that these methods are likely to play into the hands of such extremists?

I prefer to pay tribute to the enormous efforts made by the Turkish political parties and the Turkish people to ensure that parliamentary government is preserved. This morning, I returned from a meeting with the Turkish parliamentary delegation where very differing views were expressed by the representatives of different parties. When we consider what has happened in so many other countries I believe that we should admire the way in which our Turkish friends have been able to retain parliamentary institutions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in the ministerial talks with the Icelandic Government on the imposition of 50-mile limit about Iceland.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement regarding the proposed talks at ministerial level with Iceland upon the fishing limits dispute.

A delegation led by my noble Friend Lady Tweedsmuir and including representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and of the fishing industry itself will travel to Reykjavik on 26th November for meetings with Icelandic Ministers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is welcome news to know that this meeting is about to take place? How long does he expect the meeting will take, and what do he and his Department regard as the main bone of contention about which agreement has to be reached?

It would be a mistake on my part to try to guess either the duration or the agenda of the negotiations. I would rather leave that to the parties concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, for the time being at least, there is a mood of what I term qualified optimism in the deep sea fleet in Hull about the outcome of the talks? First, we are having good catches and, secondly, the Icelanders have been behaving themselves, in that they have not been cutting warps as in the past. Will he assure the House that this will not be a performance in semantics? Does he believe that because of the composition of the Icelandic team—they now have the Minister of Education as well as the Minister for Fisheries on their team—both sides will attempt to reach a decision and not just talk, as has happened over the past few months?

We shall go into the talks in a spirit of good will and with a sincere desire to arrive at agreement. As at present advised, we have no intention of adopting towards Iceland the kind of naval strategy which the Leader of the Opposition recommended towards Uganda.

In the discussions, what account is the Foreign Office taking of the fact that there is already a large measure of international support for the view that coastal States should enjoy preferential or exclusive rights to resources overlying their continental shelves?

These matters will have to come up in the discussions and agenda of the Governments of the two countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Common- wealth Affairs whether, in the interests of promoting firmer Scottish-European relationships, he will make a grant to the Scottish co-ordinating committee of local authorities.

Her Majesty's Government, while welcoming closer relationships between local authorities in this country and Europe, consider that the interests of Scottish local authorities are fully covered by the existing procedures and in organisations such as the Joint Twinning Committee.

Do not the Government think that this organisation in Scotland, which is helping to arrange further twinning between Scotland and Europe, is worthy of Government support? It is particularly helping to bridge the physical gap between Scotland and Europe, which is very important.

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman is referring to the same body. He has in mind perhaps the Scottish Co-ordinating Committee. We have not had an application from that committee. If we do receive an application we will think about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his policy regarding raising at the United Nations, as matters of international concern, conduct by national Governments which discloses a consistent pattern of violation of human rights.

We take the initiative in raising these matters only when we are directly involved, when we have adequate evidence and when we are satisfied that our action will benefit the victims of the violations in question.

Does that mean that the Government are losing interest in human rights? Even given that somewhat guarded formula, may I ask how the right hon. Gentleman reconciles it with the reply given by his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State on 23rd October, that political detainees in Indonesia are a matter for the internal affairs of the Indonesians?

It would not be fair to say that we are losing interest. As the House will be aware, in the General Assembly my right hon. Friend recently raised the question of the Ugandan Asians. We have also pledged support in the United Nations for the United States initiative about the treatment of Jews in the Soviet Union. Our experience is that there is not a great deal to be gained and perhaps, sometimes, something to be lost by raising individual cases.

What have Her Majesty's Government done at the United Nations about those people in Uganda, such as the Chief Justice and the Vice-Chancellor of the University, who have simply disappeared?

My right hon. Friend has spoken on the subject of Asians in Uganda. We have very little hard information about what else has been happening, though we share the anxiety expressed by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what communications Her Majesty's Government have received from the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics regarding the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks agreement;

The United States Government have been in close touch with their NATO allies in the course of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks.

As it would breach the letter and the spirit of not only the SALT Agreement but the Non-Proliferation Agreement if there were to be any proposal of discussions between the French and British Governments about the idea of a Western nuclear armament agreement, will the Government undertake that no such discussions between the French and British Governments on this subject will take place?

The United States have made it clear in all their discussions that their talks are concerned solely with Soviet-United States relations and have no hearing whatever on any other aspects of nuclear policy.

Will my right hon. Friend seek to ensure that whatever reductions in armaments may take place in Europe, for which we all hope, there will be no further disruption of the balance of power particularly in favour of the Warsaw Pact countries?

We shall have this consideration uppermost in our minds.

Would not the prospect of the SALT Agreement be absolutely ruined if there were a third force, a Western European military nuclear force, because either of the big two Powers would then fear that this third force might ally itself with either of the two and this fear of two against one would prevent the prospect of parity or even the reduction of nuclear arms which we hope will result from the SALT Agreement?

I do not think there is any quesstion at present of any third force in this sphere. The talks between the United States and the Soviet Union are purely bilateral.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the recent official visit of the Minister for Overseas Development to countries in Southern Asia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the recent official visit of the Minister for Overseas Development to Pakistan.

I made brief visits to Afganistan and Pakistan on my way to Delhi to attend the annual meeting of the Colombo Plan Consultative Committee, after which I spent a few days in South India. Apart from seeing development projects, I had discussions with Ministers and others about matters of mutual interest; in particular, the purposes for which future British aid might be used.

During the right hon. Gentleman's visit, were fears expressed to him that when Britain joins the Common Market South Asian countries would suffer in terms of aid and trade? Was he able to assure those to whom he spoke that Francophone African countries would not receive aid at the expense of countries in South Asia?

No. I was fortunately preceded to South Asia by my right hon. Friend the former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster who, I understand, had been able to quieten many of the fears that existed previously.

Is the Minister able to assure us that our programme of aid for Pakistan will be able to recover from any setback that it might have recently experienced from the temporary withdrawal of aid, particularly the dam at Tarbela which was itself made necessary because of India's unilateral action in the matter of the Indus waters many years ago?

We have continued our contribution to the dam and we have made available a loan of £4 million. We shall be considering further aid to Pakistan when we have the report of the recent mission of the World Bank.

Will the Minister consider in that respect the future of such funds as the Commonwealth Education Co-operation Fund and the Commonwealth Bursary Scheme from which Pakistan has been a beneficiary in the past? Can he make alternative arrangements now that Pakistan is no longer a member of the Commonwealth?

My hon. Friend will realise that there are certain consequences when a member of the Commonwealth leaves the Commonwealth. The whole question of this kind of aid to Pakistan, however, will figure in the considerations which I shall make.

Exactly what reassurances was the Minister able to give his counterparts in India and Pakistan about the consequences of joining the Common Market? Was he able to assure that in future the European Development Fund will give more than 3 per cent. of its budget to them? Was he able to assure them that the British Contribution to the EDF will be in addition to the existing aid programme?

I am sorry if I did not make it quite clear to the right hon. Lady, but the visit of my right hon. Friend the previous Chancellor of the Duchy had so allayed fears that these matters were not raised.