§ Q3. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Prime Minister what new approaches have been made in London and in Salisbury to a negotiated settlement with Rhodesia; whether he will visit Salisbury; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Q4. Mr. Sandysasked the Prime Minister if he has taken further steps to ascertain in Salisbury whether a basis exists for the resumption of negotiations with Mr. Smith for a settlement of the Rhodesian problem.
§ Q14. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister what recent approaches have been made to the Governor in Rhodesia by the illegal régime there, with a view to seeking a negotiated settlement based on the six principles; and what response has been made.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer hon. Members to the speech by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs in the debate on the Rhodesian Sanctions Order on 15th July.—[Vol. 768, c. 1203–8.]
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonIs not the regrettable republican trend in Rhodesia largely due to the Prime Minister's irresponsible involvement of the monarchy in the Rhodesian affairs? Will the right hon. Gentleman talk while there is still time?
§ The Prime MinisterIf there is irresponsibility, it is because the hon. Gentleman and others have encouraged the racialists in Rhodesia in their path. The hon. Gentleman's reference to the monarchy is totally uncalled for and totally wrong; and if he is referring to the question of the reprieve he will know the answer given by his own Front Bench on that question—a very difficult one for them and for us.
As to talks, there has been nothing to prevent Mr. Smith at any time from 1662 going to the Governor and making it clear that he accepts the six principles.
§ Mr. SandysDoes not the Prime Minister feel that, before abandoning the attempt to reach a settlement, it would be well, perhaps, to try to find out whether Mr. Smith is irrevocably committed to the new republican constitution or whether he is still open to negotiate on the old basis?
§ The Prime MinisterOur experience of Mr. Smith, not only over the last few weeks, but over the last three years, is that in alternate weeks he accepts the six principles and says that he will negotiate, and the following week he supports something as racialist as the constitution which has just been published. The position has always been that we were prepared to talk to anyone in Rhodesia who not merely accepted the principles which successive British Governments have accepted and which the House has accepted, but who had the authority to deliver. One of the difficulties about dealing with Mr. Smith is that he always seems to be thrown over by his racialists when he gets back.
§ Mr. HamiltonDoes not my right hon. Friend agree that more repugnant than the trend towards republicanism is the trend towards apartheid in Rhodesia? In the light of recent developments, will my right hon. Friend give a firm assurance to this side at least, and to the country in general, that no initiative whatever will be taken by the British Government to resume negotiations with Mr. Smith?
§ The Prime MinisterAny alleged trend towards republicanism has, of course, no constitutional validity. It is, in fact, a proposal put to a particularly racialist-minded party. The trend towards apartheid has been enshrined in recent purported legislation of the Rhodesian so-called Parliament and put into effect. This, of course, has a more practical effect on the living conditions of the Africans, who are prejudiced by it.
§ Mr. HeathWould not the Prime Minister agree that, at the moment, the proposals published in Salisbury are proposals of the Rhodesian Front and not proposals by Mr. Smith's administration? Therefore, in these circumstances, would not the right hon. Gentleman recognise 1663 that it is not really the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government constantly to argue about the past but to make a further attempt to keep in contact with the régime in order that these proposals should not develop further, because they are undoubtedly bound to make any possibility of future negotiations much more difficult? I suggest that Her Majesty's Government really will not be forgiven if they allow this situation to run on without making a further serious attempt to see whether a negotiation can be brought about.
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman has raised a number of points. He is right in saying that the present status of this document is that it has been circulated by the executive of the Rhodesian Front to the members of the Rhodesian Front. The trouble is that Mr. Smith, when the chips are down, always runs away from the Rhodesian Front, as we well know. This has happened on too many occasions for us to ignore it. To that extent, one must learn from the past.
The problem is what we face in the future. The right hon. Gentleman thought that there was some encouragement in the fact that Mr. Smith got rid of Mr. Harper. But Mr. Smith has shown no signs of proving that he is the boss and that he will not be pushed around by the racialists. We could not accept an agreement which did not fulfil the six principles or take the risk of Mr. Smith or anyone else, because of his popularity, being used as a front man and then being thrown over by a bunch of much more extreme racialists taking advantage of any concessions.
But the door is still open. Mr. Smith is perfectly free to enter it. We have tried to contact him about the publication of the proposals brought forward by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Sir Alec Douglas-Home) but, of course, Mr. Smith has obviously been very busy in the last few weeks. [An HON. MEMBER: "Get on with it."] I am answering many important questions put by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. I regard his questions as important, even if hon. Members opposite do not. We have not had a reply from Mr. Smith yet. He is free to see the Governor. He sees him quite regularly and there is no 1664 reason why he should not give an answer to the questions put to him.
§ Mr. FauldsWill my right hon. Friend accept that Britain's best friend in Africa is at present in London and that his analysis of the results flowing from U.D.I. has been a damned sight more realistic than my right hon. Friend's? Will my right hon. Friend also please accept the prime responsibility of the Government for the blood bath that is bound to ensue in Southern Africa from the lack of their own resolution?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not accept what my hon. Friend says about responsibility for a blood bath in Southern Africa following upon our refusal to use force to get a constitutional settlement, which is no doubt what he has in mind. I agree, however, that we have a very good friend here in London now. Talks have started, and are going reasonably well. We do not agree about one or two fundamental things, of which this is one, but we can find many other things to agree about.
§ Mr. ThorpeIs the Prime Minister aware that many of us accepted the wise view expressed by the Leader of the Opposition in December, 1965, that in Rhodesia we were dealing with a régime which had aspects of a police State? In these circumstances, and in view of the opinion held increasingly by a minority in this House that there are apparently no obstacles to negotiating with this enormously liberal régime, will the right hon. Gentleman accept that the majority of hon. Members do not want a sell-out to or appeasement of a racialist régime?
§ The Prime MinisterThe House will understand that there can be no question of a sell-out or of appeasement. We have stated the position with regard to the six principles time and again. We have not deviated at any point from them. They remain, as they did on H.M.S. "Tiger", the basis for an ultimate settlement. We have to be sure that those concerned can deliver. One of the troubles is that, whenever Mr. Smith is talking of a settlement, he then proceeds to get pushed around by his extremists. But he is not the only party leader to do that.
§ Mr. WhitakerIs my right hon. Friend aware that Mr. Smith said last week that 1665 Mr. Harper, whom he dismissed, was on the Left-wing of his cabinet? Is he further aware that the Daily Express Rhodesia correspondent today criticises and condemns Mr. Smith's new constitutional proposals as satisfying not one of the six Conservative principles?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that that judgment, from what I have read of the so-called constitutional proposals, is an accurate one. They do not satisfy one of the six principles and I am sure that that fact will be accepted throughout the House. Where Mr. Harper stands within that group of men is not for me to speculate about. I see that it is stated now that he was sacked as a security risk. What worries me most—not only about him but perhaps elsewhere as well—is that a man is sacked on a purely technical offence and then the person who sacks him runs as fast as he can to adopt his policies.
§ Mr. Hugh FraserIs the Prime Minister aware that, in his long exegesis of what goes on inside Rhodesia, he has told the House that in no circumstances will he negotiate with any European elected member? That is what he says. It is extremely dangerous. The right hon. Gentleman must realise that this situation is more dangerous while he continues to take this holier-than-thou attitude. Negotiation is needed since, as President Kaunda has told him, his present policy has totally failed.
§ The Prime MinisterI have never said at any point, and certainly not today, that I would not negotiate with any European elected member. I have said that we could only negotiate with those who accept the six principles accepted by this House and who have the ability to deliver in terms of getting support from others in Rhodesia. I do not even claim to be holier than the right hon. Member for Stafford and Stone (Mr. Hugh Fraser) claimed to be when he supported the six principles when he was a member of the last Government.