§ The Prime MinisterI have nothing to add to what I said in reply to Questions on 18th February.—[Vol. 778, c. 203–6.]
§ Mr. WallHas the Prime Minister received any new proposals from Salisbury? While recognising that it takes two to reach a compromise, may I ask whether this is still the right hon. Gentleman's aim or does he intend to let matters drift until a compromise is no longer possible?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman will be aware that by agreement it was understood that for the time being there would be no public statement on any exchange of messages. All that I would say to the hon. Gentleman is that I have not seen anything which remotely represents an acceptance of the "Fearless" terms, which hon. Members on both sides felt went far enough in this respect.
There is no question of letting things drift. The "Fearless" terms have been on the Salisbury table now for three or four months.
§ Mr. HooleyHas my right hon. Friend any intention of having a further meeting with Mr. Smith?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. The position is clear and it is known to the House. The "Fearless" terms are there. Any suggestion that they would be picked up and made the subject of an agreement we would act on.
§ Mr. HeathWe had an exchange across the Floor of the House nearly three weeks ago about the second guarantee for the first principle, in which the Prime Minister made it clear that he was prepared to accept two guarantees which were purely internal, and he referred me to the statement of the present Minister without Portfolio.
But the Prime Minister's second proposal included a reference to the Privy Council, and the Judicial Committee had to decide whether this was a suitable matter for a referendum. As the Prime Minister will accept two internal guarantees, will he now consider with his right 212 hon. Friend how to devise this without any external reference?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is correct in his account of what my right hon. Friend said. I should have added that when my right hon. Friend discussed this matter with Mr. Smith in Salisbury in the autumn, having put forward two proposals for internal guarantees activated by the Privy Council, he also said that he was willing to discuss with Mr. Smith an internal guarantee activated from within Rhodesia. No interest was shown in that proposition.
§ Mr. HeathWould such a proposal exclude any reference to the Privy Council, even though activated inside Rhodesia?
§ The Prime MinisterThe mechanism described to the House by my right hon. Friend involved Privy Council motivation. What I have just said—and I thought it right to say this in view of the right hon. Gentleman's question—is that we made it clear to Mr. Smith that we were prepared to consider a second guarantee, separate from the legislature itself, a non-Parliamentary guarantee, activated and operated wholly within Rhodesia.