HC Deb 19 July 1961 vol 644 cc1229-31
30. Mr. Brockway

asked the Minister of Defence if he will make a statement on his official discussions with the Minister of Defence of the Union of South Africa, the South African Secretary for Defence, and the Commandant of the South African armed forces, on the subject of the defence relations between the Union and the United Kingdom.

Mr. Watkinson

My talks with the South African Minister of Defence were, of course, confidential. They were concerned with how best to meet our defence requirements in the changed relationship between our countries. They thus formed part of the examination of our future relationships with South Africa over the whole field which is still continuing.

Mr. Brockway

The conversations may have been confidential, but does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that very big issues are involved? Is he aware of our concern about the statement of the Minister of Defence for South Africa that the main purpose of the reorganisation of his Army is to repress any internal disturbances and any incursion of Africans from other territories? Does not the right hon. Gentleman feel that we should take no part in such activities? Secondly, is it true that there was a contribution of arms to the Government of South Africa? In view of the use of our Saracens at Sharpeville and Pondoland, is it not time that we stopped sending arms to the Government of the Union of South Africa?

Mr. Watkinson

All these are rather different questions, and if the hon. Member will put them down I will seek to answer them. The main point is that South Africa is now an independent country. On the other hand, we have long-standing arrangements with her. For example, there is the Simonstown naval base, which is of great interest to our strategic dispositions. These are the matters that I discussed with the South African Defence Minister, and there is still more work to do before a settlement can be reached.

Mr. Awbery

Can the Minister say to what extent we are responsible for the defence of South Africa, which is now an independent country, and how much of this cost will fall upon our taxpayers?

Mr. Watkinson

As I understand it, since South Africa is an independent country we are not responsible.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Will my right hon. Friend keep in mind that the strategic objective of the Powers who are at least partly responsible for the trouble in Angola is the Atlantic coast of Africa, which is vital to the defence of the West?

Mr. Watkinson

I think that I had better stick to the subject of the Question. There is a very difficult tidying-up operation to be done between us and South Africa. It is in our mutual interest that we should do it.

Mr. Marquand

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that no agreement was made in these talks for the further supply of arms to the Union of South Africa?

Mr. Watkinson

No, Sir. I would not be prepared to agree or disagree with that.

31. Mr. Brockway

asked the Minister of Defence what restrictions have been placed on defence arrangements with the Union of South Africa to exclude United Kingdom commitments in relation to military assistance by the Union Government to the Government of Portugal in the territories of Mozambique and Angola.

Mr. Watkinson

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations to the right hon. Member for West Bromwich (Mr. Dugdale) on 6th July.

Mr. Brockway

I have read that reply, but it gives very little information. Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in view of our arrangements with the Union of South Africa, we should be very careful indeed that our defence arrangements do not involve us in any action by the Union Government in collaboration with the Portuguese or other Governments in Angola and Mozambique?

Mr. Watkinson

My hon. Friend's Answer was perfectly plain. He said that no such Anglo-South African defence commitment existed.