§ Q4. Mr. Brockwayasked the Prime Minister what reply he has sent to the letter of 25th June from the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia about the future of Southern Rhodesia.
§ The Prime MinisterNo reply has yet been sent. The contents of such exchanges are, of course, confidential.
§ Mr. BrockwayWhile the House will appreciate the confidential character of this exchange, can the Prime Minister say whether it has now been made quite clear to the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia how serious would be the effects of any unilateral declaration of the independence of that territory? Surely, that should be made clear.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. This has been made absolutely clear, but I hope that such an event will not take place.
§ Sir G. NicholsonIs my right hon. Friend aware that there is anxiety, perhaps ill-founded, lest the full and inevitable consequences of such an act are not known to the inhabitants of Southern Rhodesia? Will my right hon. Friend, in his own good time, see that the position is made crystal clear?
§ The Prime MinisterI would consider this. The question I was asked, and the question to which I replied, was whether the Government understood the serious consequences, and my answer is, "Yes."
§ Mr. StonehouseWhen the Prime Minister writes to Mr. Ian Smith, will he tell him that he agrees with Sir Robert Tredgold, former Federal Chief Justice, 1543 who yesterday said that a unilateral declaration of independence would amount to treason? Would he also take up with Mr. Ian Smith his unconstitutional action in consulting Mr. Verwoerd, the Prime Minister of South Africa, bearing in mind that Southern Rhodesia, as a non-sovereign State, has no responsibility for external relations of that description?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have made it clear that a unilateral declaration of independence would be an unconstitutional act. Whether Mr. Smith meets Dr. Verwoerd or not is no concern of mine,