HC Deb 09 February 1965 vol 706 cc201-5

The following Questions stood upon the Order Paper:

Q16. Mr. WALL

To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about his discussions with the Prime Minister of Rhodesia.

9. Mr. WINGFIELD DIGBY

To ask the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he proposes to visit Rhodesia; and what conditions he proposes to attach to his visit.

12. Mr. ROWLAND

To ask the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a further statement on the progress he has made towards initiating talks with the Government of Rhodesia.

15. Mr. LEADBITTER

To ask the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what proposals he now has to seek the co-operation of the Government of Rhodesia with a view to making progress towards agreement on that country's constitutional problems.

25. Mr. JAMES JOHNSON

To ask the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if it is his intention to visit Southern Rhodesia; and whether he still attaches any conditions to such a visit.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)

With permission, I will now answer Question No. Q16 and also Questions Nos. 9, 12, 15 and 25, put down to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.

My correspondence with the Prime Minister of Rhodesia remains confidential. I can, however, inform the House that when I met him in London 10 days ago I suggested that my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary and my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor should visit Rhodesia to have discussions with the Rhodesian Government and to meet a representative cross-section of opinion.

The Rhodesian Government have agreed to the visit, which is expected to last about 10 days. My colleagues will be seeing any persons they wish who are not in prison for criminal offences. They expect to arrive in Salisbury about 22nd February.

Mr. Wall

I welcome the Prime Minister's statement, but why has it taken so long to accept Mr. Ian Smith's invitation, which was first extended in November? Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that the Secretary of State will meet African chiefs as well as African politicians?

The Prime Minister

As the House knows, there have been continuous exchanges between Mr. Smith and myself. I have repeatedly extended to him an invitation to visit London so that these matters could be discussed. He did not accept those invitations, for reasons which seemed right and proper to him. We were certainly not prepared to accept some of the conditions placed on a visit by my right hon. Friend, as proposed by the Rhodesian Government.

However, Mr. Smith did visit London, as we all know, because of Sir Winston Churchill's funeral, which gave an opportunity for an extended discussion of an hour and a half. Out of that discussion this proposal has come. I ought to inform the House that part of the time mentioned by the hon. Gentleman was taken up with a proposal which we put forward and which, I think, would have been helpful. It was for senior Members of the House, of all parties, and possibly Members of another place, to visit Rhodesia and to report to the House on the problems which we all face. This was rejected by Mr. Smith. I am sorry that it was rejected, for it would have been a good idea. However, it then took some time to put forward and get the final result.

Mr. Digby

I welcome this rather belated visit, but can we be told why it is necessary for two Cabinet Ministers to go instead of one, and how long they are to stay?

The Prime Minister

I think that the) will stay for 10 days or so. Quite frankly, I would have wished, because of the peculiarly difficult problems there, affecting the whole Commonwealth and not only ourselves, that we could have sent a Commonwealth mission of senior statesmen from different Commonwealth countries. This was not acceptable and our proposal for a British Parliamentary mission was not acceptable.

In these circumstances, and in view of the vital importance to Rhodesia, ourselves and the whole Commonwealth of the issues which at present lie unresolved, and which seem almost as irreconcilable as they have been at any time, we thought it right that two of my colleagues, my noble friend the Lord Chancellor and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, should go, especially in view of the desire of the whole House, I am sure, that the opinions of all sections of African opinion, as well as European opinion, should be taken.

Mr. Rowland

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his statement will give considerable satisfaction to members of the two main African political parties in Rhodesia? May I congratulate him on having been able to establish that a mission from this country will be able to meet them?

The Prime Minister

I am sorry that I failed to answer a second question by the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall). I am sure that my noble Friend and my right hon. Friend will wish to make arrangements to meet representatives of the chiefs. Of course, the views of the chiefs were taken at the indaba, but, in addition, my noble Friend and my right hon. Friend—this is something which has been insisted on by both Front Benches in the House—will want to take a more widespread sample of African opinion, because in no country, not even in Britain, is it true that the views of the chiefs represent the views of the whole of the population.

Mr. Grimond

I welcome this greatly desired change in atmosphere and I wholly agree that it was no good sending anyone to Rhodesia until representatives of African opinion as well as the Government could be seen. However, may I ask the Prime Minister about the distinction made between those in prison for criminal offences and others? Can he give an assurance that this does not rule out any of the representatives of a considerable bulk of African opinion and will not prevent the delegation from seeing the Africans who clearly ought to be seen if the delegation is to get a comprehensive view of the situation?

The Prime Minister

We would not have put forward the idea, or agreed to it, unless we felt that all sections of opinion in Rhodesia could be met and their views taken by my right hon. Friends. The distinction to which I referred, and which is agreed with the Rhodesian Government, is between those who are in prison for criminal offences, for example, involved in violence—although even there we recognise that their laws are not always the same as some of our laws—and where a political leader is in detention or in a restricted area not as a result of a criminal conviction.

In those cases, my right hon. Friends will be able to meet those concerned. I am quite satisfied that, although at any rate one important political leader will be ruled out because he is in prison on a criminal charge, representatives of his organisation and of African opinion generally will be freely seen by my right hon. Friends.

Mr. Sandys

Does what the Prime Minister has said mean that the Rhodesian Government have lifted some restrictions which they previously imposed on the freedom of discussion by the Commonwealth Secretary, who had previously wanted to go to Rhodesia when he was in Zambia? If so, what is the change?

The Prime Minister

It is not that it has removed restrictions. At the time my right hon. Friend was in Zambia, when this matter was discussed, the leaders of the two main African parties were in prison on criminal charges—Mr. Nkomo and Mr. Sithole. While in conditions of restriction, Mr. Nkomo is not in prison on a criminal charge and it will, therefore, be possible for my right hon. Friends to see Mr. Nkomo. While they will not be able to see Mr. Sithole, who is still in prison, they will be able to see lieutenants of Mr. Sithole and to get a fair picture of African opinion.