HC Deb 17 November 1976 vol 919 cc1307-9
1. Mr. Rifkind

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the Rhodesian constitutional talks at Geneva.

4. Mr. Canavan

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement about the progress of the conference on the Rhodesian settlement.

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Anthony Crosland)

I do not intend to make a statement at this particularly delicate stage of the negotiations in Geneva.

Mr. Rifkind

Does the Secretary of State realise that while the talks in Geneva appear to be approaching a state of collapse the Soviet Union is apparently increasing its supply of arms to the guerrilla forces in Southern Africa? Will he therefore consider flying to Geneva, if that becomes necessary to save the talks, and make it clear to the nationalists that if the talks collapse at this stage many people in the world will see it as a result of their intransigence and their refusal to take "Yes" as an answer?

Mr. Crosland

I am prepared to go to Geneva if by going I can save the conference from collapse. There can be no doubt of that. We have made it clear that, whilst the talks are going on, both sides should do all that they can to de-escalate the guerrilla warfare that is going on. I do not think that the talks are now on the point of collapse. It is far too early, and it is too much of a hypothetical matter, to say upon whose shoulders such a collapse would lie.

Mr. Canavan

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that a major stumbling block to the continuation of the talks appears to be the understandable distrust that the African leaders have of Mr. Smith? Will he give an assurance that during the period of the transitional Government ministerial control of the police and security forces will not remain with Mr. Smith or any of his associates who participated in his illegal racialist régime?

Mr. Crosland

There are 101 stumbling blocks to an agreement at the conference. The one that my hon. Friend mentioned is a major one, but not the only one. Responsibility for the armed forces, security forces and law and order will constitute a central aspect when the conference gets round to discussing the question of interim government.

Mr. Maudling

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Opposition fully share his desire to see a successful outcome of the conference but that we are deeply concerned about the lack of progress at the present stage? It is difficult to understand why it was considered wise to tackle the date for independence first. Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that it seems unwise to settle the date of arrival before knowing the route by which one gets there?

Mr. Crosland

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his opening remarks. Starting with the date and time required to reach independence was a tactical decision. I have no wish to criticise Mr. Ivor Richard on the tactics that he chose. It seemed to him that the date would be an easier matter to settle than, for instance, the question who should be responsible for law and order and the armed forces. The date for independence should have been easier to settle, and it is a disappointment that a difference of three months is proving such an important obstacle.