HC Deb 15 May 1972 vol 837 cc4-9
3. Mr. Robert Hughes

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now invite Bishop Muzorewa and representatives of the African National Council to visit London for talks on constitutional proposals for Rhodesia.

The Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Joseph Godber)

My right hon. Friend saw a delegation from the African National Congress on 3rd May and I myself saw Bishop Muzorewa on an earlier visit.

Mr. Hughes

As a result of these recent discussions, do the Minister and his right hon. Friend now accept and understand that there can be no honourable and peaceful settlement in Rhodesia unless the African people of Rhodesia are freely and directly brought into the negotiations?

Mr. Godber

We understand the view of the African National Council on this and other matters. One reason for establishing the Pearce Commission was to make sure that we were fully apprised of the views of the African people as a whole.

6. Dr. Marshall

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last made representations to the regime in Rhodesia about the case of the Tangwena people.

Mr. Godber

The case of the Tangwena people was raised during exploratory discussions conducted by Lord Goodman in the latter part of last year.

Dr. Marshall

In view of the assurance given in a Written Answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Smethwick (Mr. Faulds) on 19th February, 1971, that matters of this sort would be taken into account in any negotiations for a settlement, will the Government bring maximum pressure to bear to protect the rights of these persecuted people?

Mr. Godber

Yes. I understand the point the hon. Gentleman has put. I should remind him that the proposals which were published towards the end of last year provided for an independent commission to examine the question of racial discrimination which would have a special duty to consider the provisions of the Land Tenure Act. We have very much in mind the kind of case to which the hon. Gentleman refers. Until my right hon. Friend makes his statement on the Pearce Report, it would be wrong for me to comment.

17. Mr. William Hamilton

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he is now in a position to make a statement on Rhodesia in the light of the Pearce Report.

29. Mr. Alexander W. Lyon

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he now expects to publish the report of the Pearce Committee on the proposals for a settlement in Rhodesia.

48. Mr. Biggs-Davison

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he is now in a position to make a statement about Rhodesia in the light of the Pearce Report.

53. Mr. Clinton Davis

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now give the dates when he expects to receive and to publish the report of the Pearce Commission

54. Mr. Evelyn King

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he can now state on what date he expects the Pearce Report to reach him.

58. Mr. Ronald King Murray

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he now expects to make a statement upon the findings of the Pearce Commission in Rhodesia before the Whitsun Recess.

Mr. Godber

My right hon. Friend has now received the Report of the Pearce Commission. It is a lengthy document and, as he told the House on 24th April, he will need a little time to consider it before publishing it and making a statement.—[Vol. 835, c. 1036.]

Mr. Hamilton

Is it the case—it is generally agreed that it is—that the Africans have refused to accept the proposals put forward in the joint discussions between Mr. Smith and the Foreign Secretary? If so, may we have an assurance, first, that this House will be informed before anyone else of the contents of the Pearce Report and, second, that in the event of the answer being "No" the sanctions policy will be pursued and even strengthened?

Mr. Godber

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's statement on the report which has been promised. It would, therefore, be wrong for me to comment on its contents or on any matters arising from it.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

If the settlement is not implemented on both sides, as I hope it will be, will not the Africans of Rhodesia come to curse those on the benches opposite and elsewhere who have incited them to reject the best available terms, which would have vastly improved their position and given them British aid?

Mr. Godber

Again, I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's statement. My right hon. Friend has made it clear in the House that he believes the proposals provide an honest way out of what is a very difficult situation; but we must await his statement on the Pearce findings.

Mr. Davis

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the honour of Her Majesty's Government is at stake over this issue? In these circumstances does he not think that in the interim the strongest possible representations should be made to the Government of the United States, which has embarked on a programme of sanctions busting on copper, a policy which could have a most deleterious effect on the under-developed countries which depend on this commodity?

Mr. Godber

I am satisfied about the position of the honour of this Government in relation to this matter. Indeed, it could be in no better hands than those of my right hon. Friend. As for the breaking of sanctions, there are many who have broken them, as I have previously indicated in the House, and I am not prepared to pick out one particular Government in this context.

Mr. King

Will my right hon. Friend make a clear distinction between the desirability of a settlement—and the answer to that may well be "No"—and the continuation of the Beira patrol and other political curiosities which everyone admits have not been eminently successful?

Mr. Godber

I would have thought that what Her Majesty's Government have done in regard to sanctions and the Beira patrol has been in complete fulfilment of the undertakings we gave on this matter. No decision can be announced until my right hon. Friend has made his statement, which he hopes to do shortly.

Mr. Richard

Will the right hon. Gentleman clarify two points? First, when can we expect the statement from his right hon. Friend? Will we receive it before the Whitsun Recess? Does he realise that hon. Members on this side and the country generally are anxious that this matter should be disclosed soon? Second, irrespective of what the report contains, may we have an undertaking on behalf of Her Majesty's Government that sanctions will continue and, if necessary, be intensified in the period between the report being published and the Government making up their considered view on what should be the next stage in their policy on Rhodesia?

Mr. Godber

I am happy to tell the hon. and learned Gentleman, in answer to the first part of his supplementary question, that my right hon. Friend has the firm intention of making a statement before the Whitsun Recess. The answer to the second part is that I cannot add further to what I have said because it is my right hon. Friend's wish to make the statement himself. I am sure that it will be his wish when making it to cover all these matters, the importance of which I recognise. I am sure that my right hon. Friend will not wish in any way to shirk his responsibility of explaining in full the position of the Government.

25. Mr. Latham

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will state the cost to the British taxpayer of the negotiations leading to the proposed settlement with the illegal regime in Rhodesia; and if he will also state the cost to the British taxpayer of the visit to Rhodesia by the Pearce Commission and the compilation of its report.

Mr. Godber

The final accounts are not yet available but the approximate total cost of the preliminary discussions and the subsequent negotiations in Salisbury last year is estimated at £37,000 and the visit of the Pearce Commission and the compilation of its report at £118,000.

Mr. Latham

Does the right hon. Gentleman think he will get value for money? Is not this likely to be one of the most expensive recorded "Noes" in history? Does he accept that many of us are awaiting with considerable curiosity and anxiety to discover why it has taken so long to record what one hopes will be the simple word "No" and why it should take such a large volume? Can the right hon. Gentleman at least lift the veil of secrecy very slightly and assure us that the terms of reference of the Pearce Commission have not been widened beyond those known to the House?

Mr. Godber

The terms of reference of the Pearce Commission were not widened. They were specific. As to the hon. Gentleman's point about value for money, an operation of this kind is bound to cost some money and it was certainly right that the attempt should be made. The whole House was in accord with it. The value for money of this operation was at least as great as the value for money of the "Fearless" and "Tiger" operations. I have the figures for those available if the hon. Gentleman wishes to have them.

Sir R. Cary

What has the Beira Patrol cost the British taxpayer over the last seven years?

Mr. Godber

I could not give that figure without notice.

Mr. Foley

Given the fact that the British taxpayer is to foot the bill of the Pearce Report and that Ministers have said that this is a British test of acceptability, will the right hon. Gentleman explain why Mr. Smith has received a copy of the Pearce Report before any hon. Member on either side of the House?

Mr. Godber

Mr. Smith has not in fact received a copy at this stage. It is my right hon. Friend's intention to see that a copy is made available to Mr. Smith in confidence before it is published. This is in accordance with previous practice, as for instance with the reports of the Monckton Commission and the commission that dealt with matters in relation to Malaysia at a later stage.