HC Deb 01 June 1967 vol 747 cc256-9
Q8. Mr. Sandys

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received any recent information as to whether Mr. Smith would be willing to resume negotiations for a settlement of the Rhodesian question on the basis of the "Tiger" constitution.

Mr. George Brown

I have been asked to reply.

No, Sir.

Mr. Sandys

Are the Government still insisting on majority African rule as a condition for the grant of legal independence? If so, do they not realise that this totally destroys all prospects of a negotiated settlement?

Mr. Brown

When the Smith régime rejected—in fact I do not think I am going too far in saying went back on—what was discussed on H.M.S. "Tiger", as they knew, they set in train some consequential results. One of those was that we were committed to the no independence before majority rule formula which the Commonwealth Prime Ministers had worked out. I cannot today go back on that.

Mr. John Lee

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his Answer will give great general satisfaction, at any rate to this side of the House? Does he not consider that the time has come when steps should be taken to appoint a legal Government for Rhodesia to take over when the Smith régime is turned out?

Mr. Brown

As we have said repeatedly, we are ready to discuss with anybody who is able and willing to take over the responsibility for leading Rhodesia back to the paths of legal rule. We are still ready to do that. What we are looking for is evidence that somebody is willing to do it.

Mr. Maudling

As the Prime Minister accepted the "Tiger" constitution as suitable for Rhodesia, and as this is the only possible basis visible at the moment for further discussions, why do the Government insist on N.I.B.M.A.R. which makes any further negotiations totally impossible?

Mr. Brown

Because that clearly followed on the Smith régime succumbing to the extremists in it and rejecting not only what had been offered, but what they had themselves worked out.

Mr. Paget

When is my right hon. Friend going to wake up to the fact that Rhodesia has got independence, and that nobody is going to take it away from her?

Mr. Brown

On the subject of waking up, I sometimes get the impression that my hon. and learned Friend is much more like Rip Van Winkle than I am.

Mr. Burden

As it was the intention of the Government to bring the Smith régime to its knees by the measures they have already taken, and as all the evidence is that they are not succeeding and there will be no Government other than the present one with which to treat, when are they going to reopen negotiations with the present Rhodesian Government?

Mr. Brown

I hope that we will have the support of hon. Members on both sides of the House in ensuring that this illegal régime, which is in revolt, is in fact brought down and replaced by a legal régime which will put Rhodesia's true interests first.

Mr. Ashley

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that, far from negotiating with the Smith régime, the time is rapidly coming when we should seriously consider the intensification of sanctions against it?

Mr. Ronald Bell

When are the Government going to take steps to get themselves released from this commitment which, so long as it lasts, is obviously a complete road block to preventing any further negotiations with the existing de facto Government in Rhodesia?

Mr. Brown

I am afraid that that is not the road block. So far, the road block is the unwillingness of the Smith régime to face the fact that either they themselves have to work their way towards legality or they have to give way to some régime in Rhodesia which will do so.

Mr. Whitaker

Does my right hon. Friend recollect that when the right hon. Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling) and the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys) were Colonial Secretaries and there were similar revolutions in British Honduras, British Guiana, Borneo, Swaziland and Zanzibar, twice, on each occasion the Conservatives sent troops in immediately?

Mr. Brown

There are a number of reasons why, in a number of parts of the world, I am trying to avoid following the bad precedents set for me by those who preceded me.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Is not the Foreign Secretary following the bad precedent of Lord North, whose portrait, I believe, adorns his room in the Foreign Office? Does not he think it rather a pity that when there was agreement on a constitution in H.M.S. "Tiger" it should be vitiated by this inflexibility and lack of statesmanship? Does not he realise that things are moving on? Will he take some initiative before the Constitutional Commission finishes its work in Rhodesia?

Mr. Brown

If there is a comparison with Lord North, it is clearly with the hon. Member and his hon. Friends, who are arguing for taxation without representation. As for my room, Lord North has never been there. The gentleman I removed was the King at that time, and I replaced him with Lord Palmerston.