§ 2.36 p.m.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what conclusions have been reached regarding the claim of the Rhodesian Government to have a diplomatic representative at Lisbon.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS AND FOR THE COLONIES (LORD BESWICK)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government do not accept the claim of the Rhodesian Government to have established a diplomatic representative in Lisbon. The United Kingdom Government is responsible for Rhodesia's external affairs and for the diplomatic representation of her interests in foreign countries.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the Minister for that Answer, may I say that, in view of the present negotiations in Salisbury on wider and graver issues, I do not propose to press this matter further to-day.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I am much obliged to my noble friend. I hope that the same helpful attitude will be generally adopted within the next two or three days.
§ LORD COLYTONMy Lords, I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, should have raised this matter this afternoon, but, as it has been raised, and in view of the Answer given by the Minister, I feel bound to put three supplementary questions. First of all, is the Minister not aware that, by C.R.O. Despatch No. 23 of April 30, 1957, it was laid down that, among other things, the then Federal Government of Rhodesia and Nyasaland would in future be free to appoint diplomatic agents or consular or trade representatives in countries which were willing to receive them? Is he 525 not also aware that the then Commonwealth Secretary, in a message to the then Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia on December 10, 1963, confirmed that it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government that, on the dissolution of the Federation, these and other powers of the Federal Government in this sphere should be entrusted to the Government of Southern Rhodesia? In view of that, may I ask the Minister whether it was not a breach of faith with the Government of Rhodesia for Her Majesty's Government to seek to block the appointment of Mr. Reedman as Rhodesian diplomatic agent in Lisbon?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, there has been no breach of faith, and I am bound to say that I am surprised the noble Lord should suggest that there has been. The agreement and the despatch to which he refers were that there should be negotiation on the status of the diplomatic agents; and that negotiation has not been concluded.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask whether it would not have been much more helpful if the noble Lord had refrained from putting those questions today, in view of the critical negotiations now going on? Could he not at least have waited until next Thursday, when he would have had an opportunity, in the debate set down for that day, to make the points which he has now mentioned?
§ LORD COLYTONMy Lords, I had been hoping that the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, would take his Question off the Order Paper, but, as it was put, I felt bound to put those supplementaries. Having regard to the Minister's further reply, I must ask him this further question: is it not a fact that the drafts which have been submitted by Her Majesty's Government consolidating the entrustment of these powers in the Rhodesian Government have not conformed in any way to the undertaking given by Mr. Duncan Sandys in 1963? And, in view of this, may I ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to abide by that undertaking?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I am sure that the majority of your Lordships' House will agree that no useful purpose can be served in pursuing this question at the present time.