Sri Lanka and the Commonwealth

I shall keep to that, Mr. Atkinson, and I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh) for initiating the debate. On 26 February, I received, as others may have, a message from the Bishop of Mannar, passing on a message from a parish priest in northern Sri Lanka, who said that the bishop""requested me to communicate this message to you all.""Sri Lanka's army is massacring Tamils. About 300 Tamils were mutilated and those people were thrown into camps. Heavy shelling takes place on the innocent civilians.""From Mullaithevu two elderly priests were allowed to come out on mercy grounds. These aged catholic priests witness the gruesome suffering of civilians.""These priests say that the army is pouring bombs on safer zones.""Kindly insist that International monitoring committee monitor the so called safer zones.""Both Sri Lanka and LTTE are recruiting small boys and girls. Parents are crying""If the Indian government wishes it can stop the war. Kindly put more demands on the Indian government not to support the Sri Lankan Army.""Due to lack of medical personnel and medicine most of the innocent civilians are dying. If the war is continued the Tamil race will be destroyed completely"." The message goes on in that vein. Just the other day, on 13 March, I had an update, as colleagues will have done, from the hugely respected United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and its representatives. I shall be selective in quoting from its long and full report, but it says that""some agencies are yet to be given access to the sites"—" the holding sites for people—""limiting the level of assistance that can be provided…tens of thousands remain trapped inside a 45 square kilometre area."" The report says that the people leaving the area""have described the dire conditions there, caused by severe overcrowding, serious food shortages, poor sanitation and no medical facilities."" And the UNHCR says that the LTTE has prevented many people from leaving. We are all trying to confront a situation in which the Government of Sri Lanka appear to be absolutely impervious to the criticisms of their own people and of others. The Government look as if they are beyond rational response. When the Defence Secretary, who is the brother of the President, said, as he did on 2 February, that all criticism of the Government was treason; when the army commander insisted, at the same time, that Sri Lanka is a Sinhalese Buddhist country, not a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation; but when many people of many races and faiths have been there for centuries, no wonder the international community is having difficulty winning the argument with the Government. Our plea, from all parts of the House, to the British Government is that they seek to do more, without discrediting what they have done so far. The UK must continue bilateral representations with the Sri Lankan Government. I should like the Minister to tell us what has happened since the European Union Council of Ministers came to a view in February and came up with a unanimous recommendation. I should also like to know whether it is now time to follow the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Enfield, North (Joan Ryan), which others support, including my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey), that we put the issue on the agenda at the United Nations. As this is a debate about the Commonwealth, I should like to ask three simple questions about whether we cannot get the organisation to be much more proactive. Historically, it has been willing to take action against a member Government when they have broken the Commonwealth's principles, which are that member Governments allow democracy and human rights across their territories. First, why at the Commonwealth meeting on 4 March did the Minister present—I think—represent the UK, rather than the Secretary of State or a Minister of State? There was considerable criticism that we were not represented at a higher level during the meeting of the Heads of Government and Government representatives at Marlborough house. Secondly, what specific initiatives have the British Government taken to seek to get the Commonwealth to be much more proactive—to achieve the ceasefire, the access to humanitarian aid, free journalism and, because there has been an invitation, the assurance that any British or other Commonwealth MP who goes to Sri Lanka can go wherever they feel they need to go? Finally, is the Minister sympathetic to the view that I believe my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton will express, similar to those from all parts of the House, that there must be a specific initiative by the Commonwealth, showing that it is a serious organisation that takes membership seriously? It is not an organisation without principles or rules, and those of us who are keen supporters of it believe that it must show its colours and its principles. If it does not do so now, for the people of Sri Lanka, it will not be an organisation worth belonging to. They must be shown that the relationship between Sri Lanka and the Commonwealth means something, and the Commonwealth must stand up and take international responsibility.