TNAG-1218-FCO40-1523-Future-of-the-Dependent-Territories-1983 — Page 98

25)

Parliamentary Unit

Overtaker

RESTRICTED

pa. 185/4

PRIVATE MEMBERS MOTION: MR IVOR STANBROOK: 15 APRIL: DEPENDENT TERRITORIES

1.

Please refer to Mr Clift's minute of 13 April submitting a text of a speech and background notes. We are not entirely happy with the defensive section on Belize (page 2) in the draft speech. As drafted it gives too much weight to UN opinion and too little to the wishes of the Belizeans. And having now seen the full text of Mr Stanbrook's motion we consider that the final paragraphs of the speech (pp 6-7) which deal with Mr Stanbrook's proposal for integration could usefully be strengthened. I therefore propose the following amendments. MCAD and HKGD agree.

a) (page 2 - Belize)

Delete "There was a large majority

appropriate period" and replace with "In view of the large majority in Belize who were in favour of independence, a Constitutional Conference was convened to bring the territory to independence. This House approved the arrangements and Belize was granted independence on 21 September 1981. This was welcomed at the United Nations which had passed a number of resolutions underlining Belize's rights of self-determination, independence and territorial integrity. It was also agreed that the British garrison would remain for an appropriate period.

b) (page 2 - Integration)

11

It

'... serious problems for any and all of our territories. would also be viewed with great suspicion by the international community. The authors of the UN Charter, which included the UK, did not envisage integration as a normal goal for dependent territories. The aim was, rather, 'to develop self-government'. International opinion has generally seen this as the normal course of events. And the great majority of our dependent territories have wished to go down this path. Where possible, therefore, this has been a consistent UK aim. A good measure of self-government in fact allows dependent territories and their people a greater flexibility than integration; they can remain dependent on the UK if they so wish or can make the final move to independence when circumstances make this sensible and desirable. It leaves options open for the future. In most circumstances, therefore, the Government's preference

14 April 1983

CC

PS/Mr Ons low Mr Clift, HKGD Mr Baker, MCAD

RESTRICTED

P J Roberts United Nations Dept

K 153

233 7832

HKG 02572

ка

RECEIVED A REGSTRY NO.

15 APR 1909

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

PA

REGISTRY

Action Taken

ди