RHODESIA (Hansard, 29 February 1968)

§ Q8. Mr. Biggs-Davison
asked the Prime Minister what consideration he has given to Lord Alport's suggestion of a Commission of Privy Councillors analogous to the Cobbold Commission, to go to Rhodesia after the expected General Election to report thereon and also to ascertain the views of Rhodesian citizens not qualified to vote; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Prime Minister
The noble Lord's suggestions put forward in another place were a personal contribution by him and it is not for me to comment on them. What matters is that recognition of what is needed for an honourable settlement should come from Salisbury because it is there that the difficulty lies. As the House knows the illegal régime in Rhodesia have a number of times in the past turned down proposals involving the use of Privy Councillors in attempts to bring about a settlement.

§ Mr. Biggs-Davison
Is it not significant that there is no urge to emigrate to the 1758 United Kingdom on the part of the Asian community of Rhodesia, but that on the other hand sanctions—[Interruption]—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I cannot hear the hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. Biggs-Davison
—on the other hand, sanctions are tending to encourage racialist and republican tendencies in Rhodesia? Will the Prime Minister therefore, take advantage of the ideas of Lord Alport and the up-to-date impressions of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Sir Alec Douglas-Home) in trying to seek early negotiations for a settlement which if not reached soon, may never be reached?

§ The Prime Minister
Racialist and to a less extent republican tendencies existed in the ruling circles of Rhodesia long before there were any sanctions and long before the illegal declaration of independence. So far as Lord Alport's suggestions are concerned, it was of course with our agreement that he went out last year and came back with hopes that something might be achieved; but of course, when my right hon. Friend went there to discuss these matters with Mr. Smith it was clear that to a considerable extent he had turned his back on the "Tiger" proposals. In regard to the visit by the right hon. Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Sir Alec Douglas-Home), I am looking forward to having a discussion with him later this afternoon.

§ Mr. Bellenger
Without wishing to prejudice any confidential views or expression of views either from Sir Humphrey Gibbs to Her Majesty's Government or any unofficial source, can my right hon. Friend say, from the information which he must now have received from one source or another, that there is any possibility of any compromise agreement?

§ The Prime Minister
As I have already told the House—and my right hon. Friend has—the position is that on three vitally important principles the response by Mr. Smith to my right hon. Friend in November was, as I say, more negative than it had been at the time of the "Tiger" talks. I am, of course, looking forward to a discussion with the right hon. Member for Kinross and West Perth who has, 1759 I think, returned from Rhodesia with certain facts he feels I ought to have, and naturally I shall want to consider what he has to say.

§ Mr. Maudling
Is it not a fact that the Cobbold Commission was successful in ascertaining opinion in Malaysia? Would it not be a good thing for settlement of the Rhodesian problem if the Prime Minister would indicate that he felt an analogous commission could fulfil the fifth principle?

§ The Prime Minister
I did make the suggestion and it was agreed on the "Tiger" that a suitable commission should be sent. There was some discussion about personnel, which was largely left to the United Kingdom. But before U.D.I. and on various occasions since we have proposed either a mission of Privy Councillors from this House, or this Parliament rather, or Privy Councillors or Commonwealth leaders, or Commonwealth constitutional experts, or Commonwealth Prime Ministers. All these have been turned down.

§ Mr. Michael Foot
Will the Prime Minister confirm that the commitment which governs the position of the Govment, both as regards the House and the pledge to the Commonwealth, is no independence before majority rule? Will he also confirm that the proposals made on the "Tiger" went very far indeed to appease Mr. Smith in so far as, according to Sir Edgar Whitehead, they would have meant the denial of majority rule in Rhodesia until the end of the century? Will the Prime Minister take into account these commitments in any discussions that are held in the future?

§ The Prime Minister
Our position with regard to the statement that I made in the House a year last December still stands, as I have repeatedly said it stands, and we should require a very substantial change of circumstances to justify fresh consultations with the Commonwealth on that matter. With regard to the "Tiger" proposals, it was certainly not our view, nor, indeed, the view of those involved in the talks on H.M.S. "Tiger", that such a delay would be involved. I think the best estimate we could make would have been something like 10 or 12 years on the basis of the constitutional proposals which I put forward on that occasion.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.