§ 3.11 p.m.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what they aim to achieve by the continuance of sanctions against Rhodesia.]
§ Lord SHEPHERDAs my right honourable friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary said in another place on June 24:
… if the illegal regime were allowed to suppose that sanctions could be dropped, there would be very little prospect of getting, as in the end there must be, a situation in which there are people in Rhodesia who would be prepared to come to terms.
§ Lord HANKEYMy Lords, is not the Minister aware that many people think that the "Fearless" proposals might have been accepted, if Her Majesty's Government had not unfortunately withdrawn the United Kingdom High Commissioner, and that it is always much easier to take a Mission away than to send one back?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am not quite sure to which High Commissioner the noble Lord is referring.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, arising out of the original Question, while British Intelligence has been very effective in exposing breaches of sanctions, may I ask what action is proposed through the United Nations to require Member States 464 to illegalise the "buster" sanction ships and to confiscate the cargoes, which is the real problem.
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, this is a matter which is being continually discussed at the United Nations, but at this stage I have No information which I could convey to my noble friend.
§ Lord GRIMSTON of WESTBURYMy Lords, can the noble Lord say whether it is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government that there is to be no confrontation with South Africa on this matter?—because, if there were, the cost economically for this country would be catastrophic. Could he repeat the assurance already given?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am not sure whether the noble Lord asked a question or made a statement, but if he asked a question I would say that the views of Her Majesty's Government are well known. We do not wish to see the dispute between this country—and, for that matter the world—and Rhodesia extended to South Africa.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, with the disadvantage of not having heard the Statement to which the noble Lord referred as having been made in another place, may I ask whether he is aware that an analysis of the majority of the speeches in this House in the last debate on Rhodesia indicated that a large proportion of the speakers were in doubt about even a majority for the referendum, yet in the event it was an overwhelming endorsement? Does he not therefore think it is doubtful that the proposal which he suggests for the maintenance of sanctions is likely to achieve anything? If not, what can it achieve?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord is not fully seized of the unique nature of this case. Not only is this regime in rebellion against the Crown; it is also a regime which the whole world has rejected and refused to recognise. It is, moreover, founded on a racial principle which, if persisted in, will be disastrous to Rhodesia, Africa and the rest of the world. We have to treat this as a special case. To cease the policy of sanctions would be to condone this rebellion. I do not know whether that is what the noble Lord has in mind.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, may I ask this further question? Is the noble Lord aware of the figures reported only last week in another place demonstrating the impressive way in which trade competitors of Britain are taking over an increasing proportion of imports into Rhodesia? How can that benefit our trade, our employment, and our taxes?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, I hate to say it, but I feel I must: that it is the noble Lord, Lord Barnby, and those who speak like him, in this House and in another place, who have given hope to those within the Smith regime that, if they hang on long enough, sooner or later we shall give in, despite what the world may think and what our own people may think. I only wish there were more voices from the Benches opposite which would speak out in this matter.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, the noble Lord did not answer my question.
§ Noble Lords: Order, order!
§ Lord BARNBYIs the noble Lord aware that an analysis of those who spoke in this House in the debate I have referred to showed that a proportion were evidently wrongly informed as to what was the situation in Rhodesia?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am conscious of the voices that have spoken, but I am also conscious of those that have not spoken.
§ Lord BYERSMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that it is not just a question of trade in this light? There are 4 million Africans who are looking to this country for help?