§ Q2. Mr. Winnickasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the latest situation on Rhodesia.
§ The Prime MinisterI have nothing to add to my reply to a Question by my hon. Friend, the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy) on 3rd April.—[Vol. 781, c. 650.]
§ Mr. WinnickAre not all the illegal régime's plans for a new constitution and a so-called republic completely meaningless in law? In view of the shabby advice given by the right hon. Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Sir Alec Douglas-Home) in a recent matter, will my right hon. Friend completely ignore in future advice which the right hon. Gentleman gives either on South Africa or on Rhodesia?
§ The Prime MinisterThe proposals of the illegal régime for an illegal constitution are as illegal as the régime itself and have no basis in law. The only law governing this matter is the law passed by this Parliament, which has responsibility in the matter. The right hon. Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Sir Alec Douglas-Home) is not here and there is, therefore, no point in going into his advice about South Africa. He accepted in a recent debate that the advice he brought back from Rhodesia from the same trip was also incorrect.
§ Sir C. OsborneWill the right hon. Gentleman show the same patience and tenacity in trying to get a settlement with Rhodesia as he has shown in trying to get into Europe?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not going to say in which of these two operations I have met with the more resistance. The hon. Gentleman, who made helpful comments on behalf of all of us in this House when out there, will know that we have indeed shown tremendous patience and tenacity in trying to get an honourable agreement which we could justify in this House and in Rhodesia as well. I do not think that it could be laid to the charge of the Government if, after all we have done—leaving the "Fearless" terms on the table in the face of considerable Commonwealth pres- 1326 sure to withdraw them—there is no agreement. We are still prepared to consider alternative proposals about a second safeguard if that is the sticking point, provided that they are equally effective to what we have proposed.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisHas my right hon. Friend received any reports about the new embarrassments to which Sir Humphrey Gibbs has been subjected in recent days?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. I have only seen brief reports. We shall look further into the matter. A number of reports coming from Rhodesia need to be checked—including, for example, a statement by Mr. Smith in the Rhodesian so-called Parliament yesterday about the question of a republic and what the constitutional position of Rhodesia would be even if we got agreement. I do not accept his statement on that. I should like to look further into the question of Sir Humphrey Gibbs' residence.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonWhile acknowledging the Prime Minister's efforts in relation to the "Fearless" proposals, may I ask whether it is not the case that his present attitude is, "Take it or leave it—it is lying on the table"? Is this really quite enough? Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the last hope of saving Rhodesia for the British Crown and connection may be to start talks again before the referendum?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not sure whether one can really save a country from a people determined to destroy it. We have done our best with Rhodesia. Indeed, Mr. Smith knows perfectly well—and the Leader of the Opposition helped me to clarify this point, which may well have been unclear—that the last word has not necessarily been stated on the question of the second safeguard, if Mr. Smith would only come up with proposals that we would accept. But we cannot go, on with a situation in which, year after year, we keep putting proposals which he turns down fiat on this or that point, while accepting others, but never comes forward with alternative proposals of his own. We have put forward five or six alternatives on the question of the second safeguard and have had no come-back from Mr. Smith as to what he would accept.