1106
ibraltar, as been
e terms.
form of Rock. are in
e must
t is that
which m. No would anciful
me of .abour s that time.
ctors.
of the her
shes, aced
the
that
› not
· no
be a
gue
wer
ns.
Jur
1 a
he
he
225
ne
ir,
h
ก
ì.
or
f
う
1107
Dependent Territories
15 APRIL 1983
The converse of that is that, wherever independence appears not to be feasible, or where local governments make it clear that they do not wish their territories to become independent, we are willing to continue to bear the full duties and responsibilities that accompany sovereignty. However, ultimately, the Government of the day and Parliament must be responsible for taking decisions on our dependent territories. We cannot allow the United Nations to impose a certain international status on people who do not wish it. We have sometimes had to dissociate ourselves from views expressed by the United Nations special decolonisation committee or the general assembly, but we have no reason to be defensive about the way in which successive Governments have carried out their responsibilities, and about one third of the member states of the United nations have reached independence as a result of the way in which Britain has discharged its obligations. That should be put on record today, just as I am glad to put it on record that we shall continue, wherever possible, to act in the same spirit towards our remaining territories, assisting them in a manner appropriate to their circumstances. Just to chalk up one past success, may I tell the hon. Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing) that the New Hebrides achieved independence in 1980, and is now called Vanuatu.
The motion and speech of my hon. Friend suggested that in some cases dependent territories might be integrated into the United Kingdom. The idea is not new, and was considered in the 1950s in relation to Malta and, since then, in relation to the Seychelles and Gibraltar. However, every time that it is considered, it has been found impractical. It involves permanent assimilation into the metropolitan power, representation in the metropolitan legislature, and equalisation of legislation, social services and taxation, which would raise serious problems for any or all of our territories even if it proved to be consistent with our responsibilities under the United Nations charter. We prefer to retain the straight choice between continued dependence or full independence, but we are willing to consider on their merits any proposals for alternative arrangements.
My hon. Friend the Member for Faversham (Mr. Moate) mentioned the French model. That is a peculiarly French system that has evolved over a long time, and it could not be transplanted to Britain any more easily than many other French institutions which my hon. Friend does not find congenial to British soil.
My hon. Friend the Member for Orpington said that the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man should be represented in the House of Commons-
Mr. Stanbrook: I did not say that.
Mr. Onslow: My hon. Friend said something similar to that. However, if he did not say it, I am glad, because it does not make sense. [Interruption.] There appears to be some doubt whether the words were said, but the proposition does not seem to me to make much sense, and I do not detect much demand for it in either the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man.
Mr. Stanbrook: If the Minister of State were not so anxious to gabble through his speech, he might be able to make a more coherent reply to the debate. He has misquoted me on several occasions. There is plenty of
569
Dependent Territories
1108
time available and it should be possible for him to speak at a slower speed so that we can understand and comprehend.
Mr. Onslow: I am sorry that I am speaking too fast for my hon. Friend but it is my habit to speak quickly. I hope that he will follow me, even if he has to pant a little in the process.
I understood my hon. Friend to say that he was anxious that the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man should be represented here. I did not understand him to say that he had any evidence to support the proposition. Now he says that he did not say it at all.
My hon. Friend differentiated between Hong Kong and the other dependent territories. The Government could not accept any moves which involved or even implied a lesser degree of commitment to one dependent territory than to the others. Ministers have repeatedly made it clear that they value Hong Kong's close relationship with the United Kingdom, and I shall say a little more about that in a
moment.
Independence for Gibraltar, as my hon. Friend rightly said, is governed by article 10 of the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 which, as he will know, states:
"And in case it shall thereafter seem meet to the Crown of Great Britain to grant, sell or by any means to alienate therefrom the propriety of the said town of Gibraltar, it is hereby agreed and concluded, that the Preference of having the same shall always be given to the Crown of Spain before any others." If my hon. Friend subscribes, as the United Kingdom does, to the terms of that treaty, he has to pay attention to what it says. But equally, as my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham reminded the House, the people of Gibraltar have shown themselves repeatedly and massively to be against any change in the present status. The last voting figures were 12,000 to 44.
The people of Gibraltar clearly wish to retain their links with Britain and we stand firmly by the assurances about the future status of Gibraltar which are enshrined in the preamble to the territory's constitution.
As to the territorial integrity of Gibraltar and our willingness, if necessary, to defend it by force, I hope that my hon. Friend does not entertain doubts about that. The Spanish Government-which is a member of NATO, if I may remind the hon. Member for Hackney, Central (Mr. Davis) of it-have consistently ruled out the use of force in connection with their claim to Gibraltar. Furthermore, Spain, as a party to the North Atlantic treaty, is bound by article 1 of the treaty, in which the parties undertake to refrain from the threat or use of force in their international relations. That is something upon which I hope my hon. Friend would place reliance, as I would.
On Wednesday the House was informed by my right hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Oxon (Mr. Hurd) that it is "quite normal" for ships participating in an exercise such as Springtrain-which is an annual exercise-to visit Gibraltar. Her Majesty's ambassador in Madrid has made that clear to the Spanish Foreign Ministry, and the Spanish Ministry of Defence was informed of the visit beforehand as a matter of courtesy. Given that the Spanish protest was in the form of a statement issued to the public rather than being addressed to us, there was no need, as some hon. Members have suggested, for us to respond.
My hon. Friend welcomed the Prime Minister's visit to China in September last year and, following that, to Hong Kong. The visit-which the hon. Member for Hackney, Central seems to think was such a mistake -
was the