  |
Local differences aired, as Government awaits clarification of Moratinos' statement
|
The Opposition?s Statement relating to Sr Moratinos' letter to Mr Straw is simply mendacious, says the Government.
Contrary to what the Opposition says the references to ?other principles? did not arise from, nor was it agreed at the Chief Minister?s meeting with Mr Straw. As the Opposition well knows, the reference to ?other principles? was proposed at the Caleta Palace round of negotiations between the two delegations at the Caleta Palace Hotel in September last year. At that time Mr Bossano and Mr Garcia accepted, and did not oppose the phrase.
PHRASE
Later in the year, Mr Bossano made a link between the use of the phrase ?other principles? in the Constitution and in the UN Consensus Resolution (which emerged in October, that is after the Caleta Palace Round). Mr Bossano then said that he would not now accept the reference to ?other principles? because it would mean the same in the Constitution as he claims it means in the UN Consensus Resolution, namely a possible reference to the principle of territorial integrity, as advocated by Spain.
The Chief Minister and others in the Gibraltar delegation argued that the phrase was not open to that interpretation, because, firstly Britain did not subscribe to the principle of territorial integrity in the case of Gibraltar and therefore when the UK refers to ?other principles? it does not mean territorial integrity; and secondly, because a supposed, implied reference to the principle of territorial integrity could not sit side by side with Britain?s explicit recognition in the Constitution of our right to self determination, since the two principles are necessarily mutually exclusive. Mr Bossano?s analysis and presumption could not therefore be correct or justified.
Contrary to what the Opposition say in their statement, the UK delegation did not withdraw the phrase ?without argument? and despite the Gibraltar Government?s view that it would be difficult to achieve elimination of those words. The UK delegation withdrew the phrase precisely for the reason stated above, namely that it did not and could not mean what Mr Bossano was arguing, that Mr Bossano?s assumed interpretation did not correspond with or reflect the UK?s position on the point, and to demonstrate that fact the UK would delete the phrase. This vindicated the position and interpretation of all those in the Gibraltar delegation that had, all along, rejected Mr Bossano?s untenable analysis.
INTERESTS
?On a much more important and relevant front, the Government will not comment further on the unacceptable and inaccurate content of Sr Moratinos? letter to Mr Straw until the Foreign Secretary?s response to it has been issued and considered. Yet in this respect, where there are real Gibraltar interests at stake, Mr Bossano says that Mr Straw does not need to write to Mr Moratinos to reaffirm the British position. Can it be that it suits Mr Bossano?s partisan interests for these damaging remarks to stay around and not be clarified by Britain, as Gibraltar?s interests require, so that he can continue to use them to discredit the excellent new Constitution and the Government? And therefore, could be yet another instance of Mr Bossano putting his own party political interest before those of Gibraltar?? said the Government last night.
|
|
|
|
