Vol. 393 No. 6
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of any involvement of Irish banks in loans to the Republic of South Africa; his attitude to the rescheduling of current loans to South Africa by European banks; whether this matter has been discussed by the Council of Ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
52.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, with reference to the issue of the rescheduling of foreign loans to South Africa, if he will promote the following at EPC level: (a) no rescheduling of current South African loans (b) prohibition of new short, medium and long term loans (c) termination of State credit guarantees (d) prohibition of trade credits and (e) measures against the importation of South African coal and gold, the earnings from which add to its ability to repay its foreign debt.
The recent rescheduling agreement between South Africa and approximately 250 of its foreign bank creditors was not in contravention of either United Nations or EC sanctions. Decisions on the rescheduling of South African commercial debt were taken autonomously by the banks concerned. The rescheduling agreement between the banks and South Africa has not been discussed by the EC Council of Ministers.
My information is that there is no current involvement by Irish banks in loans to South Africa.
The Government's general policy is to favour the use of sanctions to persuade South Africa peacefully to abandon apartheid. We have said that such sanctions should be selective, carefully targeted and graduated. They should be mandatory sactions, imposed by the United Nations Security Council on all members of the international community. Failing action at United Nations level, the Government are in favour of measures imposed at regional level by the European Community. Restrictive measures already introduced by the European Community include a ban on the importation of gold coins from South Africa as well as a ban on new investment in that country.
I believe that international sanctions have contributed to the recent slight improvement in the situation in South Africa. Unless there is substantial progress towards the total abolition of apartheid within a reasonable time. I would favour the introduction of further measures against South Africa. I believe that measures in the financial area, as well as a ban on the importation of coal, should be among those considered by the United Nations and by the European Community in that event.
I welcome the Taoiseach's reply, particularly the latter sections. Would he not agree that the achievement of the imposition of sanctions is mitigated by the availability of the loans? Would he confirm that I heard him correctly to say that no Irish registered bank is involved in the rescheduling of the loans? Is he satisfied that this applies to the external associates of such banks?
To take the last point first, I believe it does; my information is that Irish banks are not involved. Presumably that would cover their external associates but I will check on that. We could all agree that sanctions, and certainly international pressure, have been effective to some extent in securing an improvement, small though that may be, in the position. I might repeat that, unless there is progress, we would certainly favour the introduction of additional measures.
Does the Taoiseach mean further measures being introduced at European or United Nations level?
Immediately at European level.
Does the Taoiseach not recognise that at least one EC member state is implacably opposed to sanctions in any form and will certainly veto any attempt by the EC to introduce them, that member being Britain under the leadership of Mrs. Thatcher? Would the Taoiseach agree that that is a major hurdle to be overcome?
Yes, I am aware of the British point of view on sanctions. I would hope that we could achieve some progress——
Britain is not the only country opposed to them but is the leading one.
Of course, we can use our best endeavours in both fora.
