HL Deb 17 December 1970 vol 313 cc1600-6

6.32 p.m.

LORD ALPORT rose to ask Her Majesty's Government what progress has been made in the talks being conducted in Pretoria between Her Majesty's Ambassador and Air Vice-Marshal Hawkins, and whether they will make a statement. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. I raise this matter at this last opportunity available to me before the Christmas Recess because I think that the Government have an obligation to that loyal and steadfast minority of Europeans in Rhodesia, and to the 5 million Africans, to keep them in touch with the development of the talks in Pretoria which affect so closely their lives and interests.

I call see that, from the point of view of what might be regarded in certain quarters as the crude interests of Her Majesty's Government, there may appear to be tactical advantages in keeping the whole matter of Rhodesia quiet until after the Singapore Conference. It could be argued, I suppose, that that conference is going to take on the character of a ceremonial leave-taking of many of our fellow members of the Commonwealth by Great Britain—in fact, of the Commonwealth in the form which we have known it up to now—prior to our entry into the European Common Market; and that subsequently we shall be free of the pressures exercised on us by Canada, Australia and the Afro-Asians, with regard both to the sale of arms to South Africa and to a settlement with Mr. Smith, irrespective of any previous commitment made by Her Majesty's Government in relation to the Five Principles.

I cannot believe, and I do not believe, that the Government in general, and the Foreign Secretary in particular, would be party to such a policy, and I know that this can be dismissed out of hand. I assume—and I know that I am right in assuming—that the undertakings given by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary in the House of Commons, and repeated by the Lord Privy Seal in your Lordships' House quite recently, mean that the determination of Her Majesty's Government is that no settlement should take place outside the spirit and letter of the Five Principles, and that nothing other than that would be acceptable to Her Majesty's Government.

I would therefore draw your Lordships' attention to the fact that since a decision to start the talks in Pretoria was made, the Rhodesian Front régime has published the Residential Property Owners' (Protection) Bill, which carries racial discrimination in Rhodesia nearer to South African policy on race than has ever happened before. This is not an astute bargaining counter for use in future negotiations with Britain, to be withdrawn, in return for some political concession, at a later date. Let me quote from a leader in the Rhodesia Herald of December 9, 1970—only a few days ago. An extract from this leader is as follows: The Conservatives' initiative this year— that was the initiative to start the negotiations— was undertaken ostensibly to find out whether there was a possibility of a settlement in accordance with the Five Principles. It still seems reasonable to regard the publication of the draft Bill"— that is the Residential Property Owners' (Protection) Bill by the Rhodesian régime— as underlining the virtual certainty that the Rhodesian Government does not envisage such a settlement". I am sure that the Herald, which has played a conspicuously courageous and important part during all this long controversy, is right in the conclusions it has reached.

Anyone who has the slightest knowledge of Rhodesia knows that the publication of the Bill in question, which is part of the Rhodesian Front Party's philosophy that was demanded by its members at the last Party convention in September of this year and has now been dutifully produced by Mr. Partridge, on behalf of Mr. Smith, is simply another step towards producing the full position of racial discrimination in Rhodesia. Anyone who knows that country will also agree that, once that Bill is passed into law, Mr. Smith, or anybody else, will be unable to go back on the decision to pass that legislation.

People in Rhodesia are asking: "Why is Britain going through an empty charade of talks about some hypothetical political settlement which they realise, and the British Government should realise and which public opinion to a large extent in Rhodesia realises, cannot be a success from the start?" This is so unless—and here is the nagging fear that is felt by many people in Rhodesia—Her Majesty's Government have decided that there will be a settlement outside the Five Principles, and that the minority of Europeans who have stood by the things that we have stood for in relation to this controversy with Rhodesia are going to be left to be members of an apartheid State, and the 5 million Africans are going to be left to seek their salvation by an eventual recourse to force.

My Lords, from the point of view of those who have tried to sustain the British point of view in this long civil struggle in Rhodesia, and from the point of view of the African population, the fear of betrayal by Britain is very real and is at the present moment being fed by a continuance of the Pretoria talks. I believe that the right action for Her Majesty's Government to take at this particular juncture—an action that would test the sincerity of the Rhodesian régime, and might eventually lead to a better understanding and a better atmosphere in which those talks could be conducted, if, eventually, they might become successful—would be for the Government to make clear that they would not be prepared to continue even with the talks about talks which are going on in Pretoria at the present moment, unless the Residential Property Owners' (Protection) Bill is withdrawn and no discriminatory legislation is introduced into the Rhodesian Parliament while any negotiations, or talks about talks, between British representatives and Rhodesian representatives are in progress.

I hope that my noble friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary, when he answers my Question, will be able to say something about this. I realise very well that in his present position his scope for doing so is circumscribed. But I would emphasise that at this particular juncture it is most important that the suspicions—which are widespread—about the possibilities of a change of policy by Her Majesty's Government within the near future should be set at rest straight away, and that a definite statement that there has been no change, and that there is no prospective change, in policy should be made by Her Majesty's Government, first in the interests of those whom we feel closest to in Rhodesia, and also in the interests of the Commonwealth in general.

6.40 p.m.

BARONESS WHITE

My Lords, I am very glad indeed that the noble Lord, Lord Alport, has asked for these assurances from Her Majesty's Government, because I entirely agree with him that it would be most regrettable that we should disperse for the Christmas Recess, and before the Commonwealth Prime Ministers meet in Singapore, without having some reassurances from Her Majesty's Government on the very important matters of principle which the noble Lord has raised—not for the first time, indeed, in this House or in another place of which both he and I were Members. I entirely share his apprehensions of the legislation which is now proposed in Rhodesia. What they legislate about is of course not directly our affair, but it does very much affect the context in which any possible agreement might be reached with the Smith régime.

I will say quite frankly to your Lordships that I have always been pessimistic about the possibility of reaching any honourable settlement with that régime. One of the most uncomfortable moments in my whole public life was when I had to rise at our Party Conference and defend the policy of negotiating with the Smith régime in the early days after U.D.I. Because I simply did not believe that one could reach an honourable settlement and I think that all previous experience in fact justified me in that point of view. Nevertheless, I would not deny for one moment that Her Majesty's Government were right to attempt the exercise, provided that it was within the Five Principles.

It is because there are fears in all parts of Africa, and in the rest of the Commonwealth where they are concerned with these matters, that it could be just possible that Her Majesty's Government were contemplating some other form of settlement that I think it is right at this time to ask the noble Marquess for reassurances upon this point. These talks about talks have now been going on for some little while, and, my Lords, as I say, it is right that we should ask for this reassurance from the noble Marquess before we disperse for Christmas.

6.43 p.m.

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, may I say how grateful I am to the noble Lord, Lord Alport, for putting down this Question, and to the noble Baroness, Lady White, for taking part in this debate? I know that your Lordships will not wish me to take up the time of the House at any great length tonight, but it gives me an opportunity very briefly to make a few remarks on the points which the noble Lord and the noble Baroness have raised.

The House will remember that in reply to a Question in another place, on (I think it was) November 16, my right honourable friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary said that the House would be informed when he had something substantial to report, but that he did not intend to make any statements about the progress of Her Majesty's Government's contacts with the Rhodesian régime. I must say to the House at the moment that that remains the position. At the same time, noble Lords will be aware that we have on several occasions stressed the importance of keeping all exchanges confidential at this stage. I do not think my noble friend Lord Alport has interpreted this refusal, if you like, to disclose the substance of our communication with Mr. Smith as some sinister indication that we intend to abandon the Five Principles. I should like to say to him and to the noble Baroness, quite categorically, that this is not so. Her Majesty's Government have given repeated assurances on this point; and I would also remind the House of the speech made by my noble friend Lord Jellicoe exactly a month ago in which he said the same thing.

The reason we wish to keep exchanges confidential is quite simple: it is to avoid publicity which might prejudice the outcome of our approach, and we hope that the Rhodesians will do the same. I should like at the same time to make it clear that there have not been any talks between Her Majesty's Ambassador in Pretoria and Air Vice Marshal Hawkins in the sense of negotiations, or indeed of conversations; nor between anyone else on behalf of Her Majesty's Government and the Rhodesian régime. There is absolutely no question of negotiations until we are satisfied that enough common ground exists to make them worth while.

Thus, as we have repeatedly made clear, the first step towards resolving this problem is to establish whether or not the régime are willing to negotiate realistically on the basis of the Five Principles. This was the purpose—no more and no less—of the communication sent last month to Mr. Smith through Her Majesty's Ambassador in Pretoria. And I can assure your Lordships that if any developments of substance do occur, a Statement will be made at the earliest opportunity to your Lordships' House. I should like to resist the suggestion made by my noble friend that this is an empty charade. I think the suspicions that he has alluded to are unfounded in this respect.

It has been suggested that the news of the régime's intention to introduce legislation which will enable Europeans to bring about: the expulsion of non-Europeans from their residential areas shows the futility of trying to reach a settlement. While Her Majesty's Government deplore anything which would increase racial discrimination in Southern Rhodesia, I would not agree that this or, for instance, their action against the leaders of the multi-racial co-operative, Cold Comfort Farm, must be regarded as an indication that the régime are not prepared to negotiate within the Five Principles, and that consequently Her Majesty's Government should abandon their attempt to find a settlement on that basis. On the contrary, we feel that these developments underline the urgent need for us to continue our efforts to carry out the commitment, which has been clearly and repeatedly explained, in the hope that we can help to create the kind of atmosphere where constructive change can be brought about. Certainly we are not in a position to do this in present circumstances.

My Lords, we stand firm in our belief that we are pursuing the right—indeed, the only practical—course to solve this problem. I do not know whether we shall succeed, but we must hope that the Rhodesians will recognise the enormous advantage of a settlement for their country, and that they will appreciate that the consequences of failure will be serious for the future of Southern Africa as a whole. For it will encourage those who believe that violent upheaval is inevitable in Southern Africa—a view which Her Majesty's Government are by no means prepared to accept.