§ 3. Mr. Winnickasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the latest position with regard to the illegal régime in Salisbury.
§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Maurice Foley)I have nothing to add to the replies given by my right hon. Friend to Questions by the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) and other hon. Members on 2nd March and to a Private Notice Question by the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys) on 19th March.—[Vol. 797, c. 11–21; Vol. 798, c. 615–22.]
§ Mr. WinnickWould not my hon. Friend agree that the recent closing of foreign consulates in Salisbury is a slap in the face to the Rhodesian Front and some of its fraternal allies on the benches opposite?
§ Mr. FoleyCertainly. This is a real demonstration of the way in which Mr. Smith and his illegal colleagues are in total isolation from the rest of the world.
§ Mr. LongdenDo Her Majesty's Government now dissent from the dictum that recognition of another Government does not imply approval of that Government's domestic policies or of the means by which it came to power? Surely that was the principle on which all parties in this House rightly recognised the present Government in Peking.
§ Mr. FoleyI am surprised at the hon. Gentleman equating a situation in a foreign country with a Colony in rebellion. That is the basic difference.
§ 7. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many foreign consulates in Rhodesia have been closed in the last two months.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs my hon. Friend aware that that Answer is satisfactory as far as it goes and in so far as it stigmatises Rhodesia as the political leper of the civilised world? But will he tell the 9 House what the practical effect of the closure of these consulates is and whether the Government intend to bring pressure on those Governments which have closed their consulates to follow the logical consequences of their action and stop further trade with the illegal régime?
§ Mr. FoleyWe have, over many months, drawn the attention of friendly Governments to the evasion of sanctions policy. Some of the countries which have closed their consulates did so in advance of the Security Council resolution, and others following it. It is now a question of trying to maintain the pressure for sanctions to become successful. I think that the United Nations Sanctions Committee takes its work seriously and is effective.
§ Sir G. NabarroIs it not a fact that the principal trading beneficiary, following the withdrawal of British interests in Rhodesia, is West Germany, and that the shutting of any formal representative office of West Germany in Rhodesia means nothing whatever in this context because West Germany is not a member of the United Nations? How do the Government propose to deal with that aspect of the matter?
§ Mr. FoleyI am not aware, and I do not agree with the assertion of the hon. Gentleman, that West Germany benefits more than anybody else in terms of trade with Rhodesia.
§ Sir G. NabarroThen the hon. Gentleman must be dead from the neck up.
§ Mr. FoleyIf the hon. Gentleman is advocating that there should be no sanctions whatever, I suggest that he should talk with his right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition who, on 26th March in this House, after many weeks of questioning, stated that he would continue with sanctions prior to his so-called negotiations.
§ 8. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which public servants in Rhodesia have resigned their appointments as a result of his warning of possible prosecution.
§ Mr. FoleyMy right hon. Friend's statement of 2nd March gave no specific warning of possible prosecution of civil 10 servants. Its purpose was to make clear that, with the lapse of the Governor's injunction, public servants who continue to serve a régime in rebellion against the Crown could no longer be regarded as servants of the Crown, and that, in the light of this, it would be for the courts to consider the legal consequences of their acts for individuals affected thereby. I have no information about resignations in Rhodesia.—[Vol. 797, c. 12–13.]
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonWhen is all this nonsense going to stop? When will the Government face the realities in Rhodesia, or, if they cannot do that, will they at least tell the House at long last the purpose of their policy?
§ Mr. FoleyI am surprised that the hon. Gentleman refers to an illegal régime which is pursuing an apartheid policy as nonsense. I should prefer him to look closely at the statements made by the churches and, in particular, the Roman Catholic Bishops in Rhodesia on the deplorable situation.
§ 13. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further discussions he has had with diplomatic representatives of South Africa and Portugal, since the declaration of a Republic of Rhodesia concerning sanctions breaking.
§ Mr. FoleyWe have had discussions with the South African and the Portuguese Governments, and with other Governments, since the illegal declaration. Such discussions are, of course, confidential.
§ Sir G. NabarroOnce again, is it not a fact that Her Majesty's Government make no progress whatsoever and continue to take the punishment on the chin, non-stop? While declaring myself utterly opposed to sanctions against Rhodesia, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that Rhodesia is now receiving unlimited supplies of petrol, raw materials and manufactured goods through South Africa and Portuguese territories, and are not sanctions therefore rendered utterly void and valueless?
§ Mr. FoleyNo, Sir. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the statement by his right hon. Friend from the Opposition Front Bench on 26th March.
§ Mr. Leslie HuckfieldWill my hon. Friend ignore the support of the illegal Rhodesian régime given by the benches opposite, and at the same time tell the House what investigations his Department is making into sanctions breaking by firms based in this country?
§ Mr. FoleyIf we receive any evidence of companies in this country evading sanctions, they will be prosecuted through the courts, as has been the case in the past.
§ 14. Mr. Boyd-Carpenterasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many countries maintain trade missions in Rhodesia; which countries so do; and what changes in this respect have taken place since 2nd March, 1970.
§ Mr. FoleyThere are no separate trade missions in Southern Rhodesia. This has been the position since shortly after the illegal declaration of independence.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIn view of the absence of what the hon. Gentleman calls separate trade missions, has there been a diminution in the flow of trade from those countries to which the hon. Gentleman referred a few minutes ago as benefiting from the restrictions resulting from sanctions on British trade?
§ Mr. FoleyIf the right hon. Gentleman is referring to trade from Rhodesia with countries which have closed their consulates, with the exception of South Africa and Portugal the answer is "Yes".
§ Mr. Philip Noel-BakerWill the Government now reconsider their decision about air communications and realise that if air communications were cut off all other factors would be greatly increased in efficacy?
§ 27. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs why, in view of its educational character, the export to Rhodesia of the Battle of Britain film has been stopped; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. FoleyAs I explained in reply to a Question from the hon. Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) on 16th 12 March, only education and news film is licensed for export to Southern Rhodesia. The film, "The Battle of Britain" is not an educational film in the accepted meaning of those words.—[Vol. 798, c. 12.]
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonIs not this an entirely educational film, being the history of the Battle of Britain? Are the Government not ashamed of their childishness? Were they, perhaps, irked by the fact that one of the "Few" had "Rhodesia" on his shoulder?
§ Mr. FoleyThere is no question of our being ashamed. It is purely and simply a question of definition. This film was produced as a commercial film, for commercial distribution and showing. If the hon. Member wants me to define what I mean by an educational film I can tell him that it is a film produced exclusively for instructional purposes for showing in schools or other institutions, or by the B.B.C. or Independent Television for use in schools.
§ Mr. WinnickIs not there a case for this film being shown in Rhodesia, so that the Rhodesia Front and its allies can learn how an earlier system of racial tyranny was defeated?
§ Mr. LambtonWill the hon. Gentleman put in the Library a list of all the films exported to Rhodesia since independence?