§ Q4. Mr. Wallasked the Prime Minister what communications he has received from Mr. Ian Smith; and what action he proposes to take about the settlement of the dispute with Rhodesia.
§ The Prime MinisterNone, Sir. I have nothing to add to what I said in the debate on the Address on 2nd July.—[Vol. 803, c. 81.]
§ Mr. WallCan my right hon. Friend say whether the promised talks are likely to take place before the end of this year?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot give any indication when such talks are likely to start.
§ Mr. JuddCan the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that any settlement of this dispute can only be one which is acceptable to all the people of Rhodesia, whatever their racial origins?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have said that the settlement must be in the context of the five principles, and that covers that particular point.
§ Mr. Evelyn KingHas the Prime Minister seen the conclusion of the United Nations Committee appointed to consider sanctions, to the effect that sanctions have not been fully effective, and have not led to the desired results, and would he and the Government in their consideration have regard to that neutral view?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is true that sanctions have not brought about the desired objectives, in so far as they have failed to bring Rhodesia back into the constitutional fold, but it is undeniable that they have had an impact on Rhodesia. The proposal is that those sanctions should remain pending negotiations.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisThe Prime Minister constantly talks of the five principles, but were there not six principles? Which has he thrown overboard?
§ The Prime MinisterFive principles were agreed between my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, when Prime Minister, and Mr. Smith. The sixth principle was created by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition at a later date.
§ Mr. Harold WilsonIs the Prime Minister aware that the five principles were not agreed with Mr. Smith before 1964? All the exchanges are on the record in the Blue Book issued by the late Government. The sixth principle, which I did invent, was very much welcomed at the time in the House by both sides because what it said was that we should protect the rights of the majority before majority rule and, more important still, the rights of the minority after majority rule. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, therefore, that he was wrong in his answer?
§ The Prime MinisterThe latter part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is already covered by the five principles. In fact, if the five principles were put into practice there would be no need for the sixth—
§ Mr. Wilsonindicated dissent.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, because it would be covered by the constitutional arrangements. As to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, this was arranged in talks between Mr. Smith and my right hon. Friend.