RHODESIA

HC Deb 05 July 1966 vol 731 cc252-8

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson

With your permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that of the House. I should like to make a statement on Rhodesia.

As the House knows, talks have been taking place in Salisbury between British and Rhodesian officials, on an exploratory basis and without commitment on either side, to see whether a basis exists for negotiations. The purpose of these talks has been to see whether negotiations based on the six principles could ultimately take place, and with whom those negotiations would be held, on a constitutional basis.

I should like to thank the House for its patience in not pressing for information; but, since I have to inform the House that these talks are being adjourned for a period, it is right that without breaching the secrecy which I have told the House I consider essential, I should say something about the stage which has been reached. The discussions have been useful in clarifying attitudes and intentions and in further identifying the problems which have to be met in order to achieve a solution acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole, and acceptable to this House. It has been agreed that there should now be a pause for further consideration of the respective positions, before the talks are resumed later in the month. In the interval sanctions will, of course, be fully maintained.

So far as Her Majesty's Government are concerned, they intend to employ the pause in hard thought on all the main aspects of the Rhodesian problem, particularly the right constitutional arrangements within Rhodesia and Rhodesia's future place in the family of nations. These are related and, indeed, inseparable aspects of the same problem, for there would be no purpose in reaching agreement on the constitutional future of Rhodesia if that agreement did not at the same time win for Rhodesia acceptance in international society. It is expected that the talks will be resumed at a fairly early date. The House will agree that it is important that they should then make more rapid progress, for I am sure that the House will also agree that the present situation cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely.

Mr. Heath

The House is glad that the right hon. Gentleman has found it possible to make this statement. At the same time, will he realise that the House will find itself in a slightly difficult position over the timetable which he has announced in that after this pause the talks will be resumed, the House will he rising, presuambly, early in August, and I understand that there is to be a Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Con- ference in September, so that the House will not have any opportunity of expressing its views about the progress of the negotiations or any of the issues being discussed? Will the Prime Minister kindly bear this in mind? Perhaps we could put him on notice that we may have to ask him for a further statement, bearing in mind the possibility of requiring a debate later.

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman is right in the points that he has made. I have in mind what he said three or four weeks ago—and I agreed with him—that there must be a fuller statement before the House adjourns for the Summer Recess. I cannot at this moment say how much progress might have been made by that time, but I agree that there must be a statement which will be as full as we can make it. Whatever the state of the discussions, I hope to make the statement in sufficient time before the Recess to allow the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends, if they wish, to debate it afterwards.

Mr. Bellenger

Although the House understands the difficulties of this situation, nevertheless the mere fact that discussions are taking place on an official level has raised hopes which we trust will not be dashed, but they cannot go on interminably. Will my right hon. Friend therefore announce to the House at some time when these talks are to be raised from that level to something much more high-powered, because the situation to which the House has agreed, namely, the imposition of sanctions, is causing a tremendous deterioration in the Rhodesian economy which will not be conductive to a settlement of this dispute if it is delayed for too long?

The Prime Minister

I agree with my right hon. Friend in expressing concern about the situation—not only because of sanctions, but for many other reasons—if these talks do not make progress. I could not give any indication of the rate, or even the probability or otherwise of the talks becoming negotiations until we have made more progress in the talks, because I am sure the House will insist that there should be no question of negotiations with anyone unless we are satisfied not only on the constitutional basis, but that they are likely to give effect to the six principles on which successive Governments and this House have insisted.

Mr. Sandys

Will the Prime Minister see that the adjournment is as short as possible, because delays in this kind if situation are obviously dangerous?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir. I shall certainly see that the adjournment is as short as we can make it, though if talks are going round and round on some rather narrow aspect of one or other of the principles, this, too, is dangerous, and this is why I said that during the adjournment in the next few days we will give very deep thought to any further ideas that we may have to try to bring this matter to a successful conclusion, given the conditions which the House will insist on our keeping to.

Mr. Paget

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he is to be congratulated on the seriousness and, above all, the secrecy of these talks? But, further to that, will he bear in mind that a number of the measures which Rhodesia has to take to meet sanctions will be irrevocable, and will link her more closely with South Africa, and that her readjustments to the south with South Africa are very much easier than the adjustments of Zambia to the north, and that as time goes on it will become more and more difficult to get back to a reasonable relationship?

The Prime Minister

I agree with my hon. and learned Friend that these talks have been serious, and I am glad to say that they have been secret. A high level of secrecy has been maintained. My hon. and learned Friend will recognise that the solution must be one which is acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole, it must be acceptable to this House, and it must be acceptable to the general community of nations.

My hon. and learned Friend will realise—and here I am thinking of what the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition said a few moments ago about the Commonwealth conference in September, for example—that the British Government are in a most intolerable position in that we have to bear the international responsibility for the Rhodesian situation because of the clear admission all over the world about where sovereignty lies; and that in an international sense we have throughout these months, as our predecessors did, been sheltering Rhodesia from world opinion. It is extremely difficult and galling to have to carry that position when, at the same time, our physical power, in terms of our ability to affect the situation and the settlement, is so limited for reasons that we all know and about which none of us can be happy.

Mr. Thorpe

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it will not come as a surprise to some of us that there has not proved to be a sufficient identity of views between the two sides to form a basis for negotiations? Are we to take it that the communiqué from Lagos on 12th January still obtains, particularly the reference to the period of direct rule, moving to constitutional talks? Secondly, since the talks are to be adjourned until later this month, is the right hon. Gentleman suggesting that a period of three weeks' hard thinking and three weeks' continued sanctions will produce a very dramatic change of heart? Would it not be better to adjourn the talks until September, when sanctions will have had longer to bite?

The Prime Minister

The House debated the Lagos communiqué very fully after the Lagos Conference, and I made a full statement on the question of direct rule, the 1961 Constitution, and the rest, on 25th January.

The hon. Gentleman refers to three weeks' pause and then three weeks' negotiations. I hope that in this pause it will be possible for attitudes to develop—we certainly intend to think very hard about the timetable here—which will help to force the pace a little.

I do not agree with the hon. Member that the sensible way would be to adjourn until September and let sanctions work more severely on Rhodesia. In any case, as he knows, and as the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, there is the Commonwealth conference in September, and I feel that it would be a great mistake to cease to make any progress which could be made while waiting for that.

Mr. Dickens

During the adjournment will the Prime Minister consider taking steps to broaden the basis of these talks to include representatives of African opinion in Southern Rhodesia, since the Africans form the majority of people in that country?

The Prime Minister

These are preliminary talks, designed to lead ultimately, if they are successful, to discussions on a constitutional basis. As I have said, we still have to settle the question with whom these discussions should then take place. In these preliminary talks it would not be helpful—if l thought it would be I should recommend it—to widen the basis of the talks. My hon. Friend will remember that when I was in Salisbury last October I had wide-ranging talks at the highest level will every branch of African, Asian and coloured opinion.

Mr. Wall

When these talks restart at the end of this month, does the Prime Minister intend that they should be at a Civil Service or at Ministerial level? Does he recall the appeal that Mr. Smith made publicly that they should continue at Ministerial level? Is there any unbridgeable gap at the moment?

The Prime Minister

The position has always been—it was Mr. Smith who stated it a long time ago, and right hon. Gentlemen opposite have also said this—that they should be without commitment at an official level, and not a Ministerial level. I do not know how the hon. Member could suggest that there could be such talks at Ministerial level, because there are no Ministers in Rhodesia. That is why I said that one of the problems to be solved is the problem of the constitutional basis of the talks, and with whom they should take place.

Mr. John Lee

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the fact remains that this adjournment suggests that they have run into difficulties? Will he bear in mind that some hon. Members on this side of the House who have been waiting impatiently for the sanctions to take effect are beginning to think that the time has come for more drastic action to be taken to restore law and order in Rhodesia?

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend will be aware that sanctions are having a deep effect in Rhodesia. If he is not aware of that, I know that many people in high places in Rhodesia are aware of it. I have made it clear that until this issue is solved there will be no question of relaxing sanctions. But I have not heard any suggestion that on the part of Her Majesty's Government—the position of Zambia is a different one—there should be a tightening up of sanctions.

Mr. Heath

The Prime Minister has rightly emphasised that any solution must be acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole—this has always been known as the fifth principle—and also to the House, but I think he added this afternoon that it must also be acceptable to the international community. It is not difficult to think of some countries to whom the only acceptable solution would certainly not be acceptable to this House. Will the Prime Minister recognise that the additional principle which he has enunciated is one that we shall want to consider carefully and to have clearly defined?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir. On a number of occasions I have sought to draw the attention of the House to the fact that although this is a matter for British legal responsibility—it is not contested in the House—and although we have sought to keep it in our own hands, there is deep international concern about it. We are "carrying the can" and sheltering Rhodesia while remaining powerless to get the solution that we in this House would consider right. I do not think that anyone could devise a constitution for Rhodesia which would be universally acceptable to all the 100 members of the United Nations, ranging from one extreme very much to another. We have to produce a solution that we think is the right one, and one that we can defend.