Angela Watkinson

Conservative Party | Upminster

Gibraltar

Angela Watkinson (Upminster): I am privileged to have the opportunity to open this important debate on Gibraltar. However, I am ashamed that the debate should be necessary. It is necessary because of the Government's disgraceful mishandling of negotiations with Spain, in their efforts to enhance an Anglo-Spanish alliance with the European Union that would balance the Franco-German axis. They are using the offer of joint sovereignty with Gibraltar as a bargaining chip, but without consultation with, participation by, or a mandate from Gibraltar. Gibraltar is our most loyal colony. It is iniquitous that its people should have to suffer any uncertainty about their future sovereignty.

Gibraltar was ceded to Great Britain under the treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Article 10 of that treaty states that should Britain ever give up sovereignty, Gibraltar would pass to Spain. British policy is based on article 73 of the United Nations charter, which gives paramount importance to the inhabitants of the territory. Gibraltar will therefore remain British for as long as its people so desire. The inhabitants of Gibraltar demonstrated, in a referendum held on 7 November 2002, that an overwhelming 99 per cent. of them do so desire.

Who could forget the wonderful display of Union flags when the people took to the streets to demonstrate the strength of their patriotic desire for the continuation of Gibraltar's present status?

Mr. Mark Hendrick (Preston): Will the hon. Lady give way?

Angela Watkinson: I should like to make a little progress.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram), the shadow Foreign Secretary, said:

"You could not have a clearer, democratically expressed view. To proceed, or to pretend to proceed, in the light of this, is to defy reality."

Gibraltar is of immense strategic value to the United Kingdom, as NATO's key communications centre in the western Mediterranean and as a forward base for British troops.

Mr. Hendrick: Can the hon. Lady say why a referendum was not given to the people of Hong Kong, given that country's strategic importance to the United Kingdom?

Mr. Richard Spring (West Suffolk): It was on a lease.

Mr. Hendrick: I shall finish what I was saying. Hong Kong island was not on a lease; neither was Kowloon. It was the new territories that were on a lease. Why were not the same arguments made for Hong Kong by the Tory Government?

Angela Watkinson: The basis on which a referendum could have been justified in Hong Kong was entirely different. As a British colony, Gibraltar is a special case.

Gibraltar is of immense strategic importance to the United Kingdom. Even if it had no strategic importance, the emotional ties of the past 300 years - ties of culture, tradition, heritage, history and loyalty to the Crown - bind us together. Gibraltar is family. In the 21st century, we no longer give away our princesses against their will in diplomatic marriages.

For Spain, joint sovereignty over Gibraltar is only a stepping-stone on the way to achieving its long-held ambition of full sovereignty and full access to Gibraltar's military base. Long-term harassment and a campaign of restrictions, such as land border delays and inadequate telephone capacity, have made life unnecessarily difficult for Gibraltar. EU directives that cause a financial burden are imposed, whereas beneficial directives are withheld.

In the recent negotiations, Spain made no effort to redefine its position, so persuaded was it by the Government that Gibraltar could be delivered. However, it could not be delivered - not without the agreement of its people, and that could not have been withheld more clearly. The way forward—the way to improve the relationship between Spain and Gibraltar - depends on Spain changing its attitude and becoming a good neighbour.

Bob Spink (Castle Point): As my hon. Friend is discussing the way forward, will she join me in encouraging the Conservative Front-Bench team categorically to state now that Conservative policy is totally to reject the joint sovereignty initiative, which is a deception on the people of Gibraltar and a betrayal of them by the Government?

Angela Watkinson: I thank my hon. Friend for that. He will find that I absolutely endorse what he says in my remarks.

It is nothing short of a diplomatic disgrace that the Government reopened bilateral talks with Spain on the Brussels process without Gibraltar and with the aim of securing joint sovereignty in the wake of Gibraltar's conclusive referendum. The rights of the people of Gibraltar to self-determination were bartered over behind their backs by the British and Spanish Governments. It is not for politicians in London or Madrid to decide the sovereignty of Gibraltar - it is for the people of Gibraltar to do so, and they have made their decision for the rest of the world to see.

Mr. Chris Bryant (Rhondda): If that is true, will the hon. Lady explain why Peter Caruana, Gibraltar's Chief Minister, did not take part in the discussions and left vacant the seat that was available for Gibraltar? It is surely wrong to say that bartering was going on behind Gibraltar's back if it was invited to join the discussions.

Angela Watkinson: It is very clear why Peter Caruana did not take part - he was not given the same status as the other participants. The fact that joint sovereignty was on the agenda precluded him from taking part. The issue was a non-starter for Gibraltar.

The prize simply was not deliverable. If Spain was given the impression that it was, it was misled. Far worse, Gibraltar was betrayed. It was deeply hurtful for Gibraltar to learn that its future had been the subject of covert horse-trading between Britain and Spain, which had been carried out in the interests of enhancing their positions in the EU. However important Britain's relationship with Spain, it is not more important that our historic links and loyalty to Gibraltar.

It is entirely spurious to excuse such behaviour by pretending that it was in the interests of Gibraltar's economy and that it was intended to guarantee Gibraltar and the surrounding area a prosperous future. No one - least of all Gibraltarians - would suggest that Gibraltar's economy has reached its full potential. Of course it can and will be developed further. Since the closure of the royal naval dockyard in 1985, tourism has become increasingly important, and Gibraltar is now a popular holiday destination - not least because it is British. It is also sunny. Commercial ship repairing and financial services render Gibraltar economically self-sufficient. It is not dependent on smuggling, as Spain has sometimes suggested. Happily, there is now full co-operation between the customs services of Spain and Gibraltar. As both countries are in the European Community, there is no incentive to use Gibraltar as a conduit for the illegal trafficking of people or drugs.

I know just how relieved Gibraltarians were to receive the Prime Minister's recent assurance, which he gave in response to a parliamentary question from me, that the future of Gibraltar played no role whatever in his negotiations with José María Aznar in securing Spain's support for the war against Saddam Hussein. The many letters that I have received from people living in Gibraltar - and in this country - illustrated the level of concern that has been generated by those joint sovereignty talks. There is much to do to dispel that concern.

The report of the Foreign Affairs Committee on Gibraltar could not have been more critical of the Government in its findings. It points to a failure to disclose that joint sovereignty with Spain was even under discussion. The report states that:

"Britain's negotiating position with Spain could not have been prejudiced by the British Government disclosing on, or shortly after, the relaunching of the Brussels Process in July 2001 that joint sovereignty over Gibraltar was under discussion as the Spanish Government was already fully involved in those discussions. We further conclude that the refusal of Ministers to make such a disclosure represented a serious failure in their accountability obligations to this Committee and to Parliament."

Gibraltar's referendum has been referred to as "eccentric". The Foreign Affairs Committee concluded that it rejected the Foreign Secretary's view that it is eccentric for the Government of Gibraltar to hold its own referendum. It added:

"We consider that in British Overseas Territories it is of great importance that democratic expressions of view should take place when territories themselves so determine. We recommend that the British Government take full account of the views of the people of Gibraltar as expressed in the referendum held on 7 November."

The Committee points to the failure to seek the endorsement of Gibraltar's Chief Minister. The report states:

"We conclude that the Government was wrong to negotiate joint sovereignty, when it must have known that there was no prospect whatsoever that any agreement on the future of Gibraltar which included joint sovereignty could be made acceptable to the people of Gibraltar, and when the outcome is likely to be the worst of all worlds - the dashing of raised expectations in Spain, and a complete loss of trust in the British Government by the people of Gibraltar."

The Committee recommended that the Government should explain in its response whether previous Governments had, as it appeared from the evidence, made a commitment to the Gibraltar Government to seek the Chief Minister's specific endorsement before entering into any new arrangement affecting Gibraltar at the Brussels process talks. It asked why - if this was indeed the case - the current Government have not decided to renew that commitment?

The Committee pointed to a failure to discern the difference between the legitimate complaints of Gibraltar against Spain, and the unjustified complaints of Spain against Gibraltar. The report states:

"We conclude that it is highly ironic that the British Government has given credence to complaints by Spain about law enforcement and the supervision of financial services in Gibraltar, given that these areas are the responsibility, not of the Gibraltar government, but of the British government and of the Financial Services Commission, appointed by it."

The Committee concluded that there was no parallel to be drawn between Gibraltar's legitimate complaints against Spain, and Spain's unjustified accusations against Gibraltar.

The list is long and shaming. Those were just a few examples from it. There simply is no mandate for talks between Britain and Spain on sharing the sovereignty of Gibraltar. Spain, for its part, could never agree to joint sovereignty in perpetuity. The 1969 Gibraltar constitution prevents the transfer of sovereignty unless or until the people of Gibraltar agree. Those two positions are irreconcilable. The Government must eat large portions of humble pie.

Where do we go from here? Unfortunately, life is not like a video tape; it cannot be rewound, and the parts that we do not like - or wish had never happened - cannot be erased. In real life, we must live with our mistakes and find ways to make amends. Going back is not an option, so we can either stand still or move forward in ways that will benefit everyone. Three-way talks are needed now to re-establish the trust and confidence of the people of Gibraltar and to improve relationships between Spain, Gibraltar and the United Kingdom.

There are plenty of possibilities. How better to start than by finding a workable solution to the unsatisfactory situation on pension contributions? The Gibraltar Government are required to pay full pensions to a large group of people - they happen to be Spanish - who have barely contributed to the Gibraltar pension fund. There are similar anomalies about community care on which work needs to be done. Meaningful discussions to lift land border delays and to improve Gibraltar's telecommunications would be fertile ground in creating good neighbours and improving life on the Rock.

It is the undeniable right of the people of Gibraltar to remain British until they - and only they - decide otherwise. That right must be defended. We enjoy the privilege of Gibraltar's loyalty and they deserve ours in return.