HL Deb 26 January 1971 vol 314 cc843-54

The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of independent sovereign states, each responsible for its own policies, consulting and co-operating in the common interests of their peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace.

Members of the Commonwealth come from territories in the six continents and five oceans, include peoples of different races, languages and religions, and display every stage of economic development from poor developing nations to wealthy industrialised nations. They encompass a rich variety of cultures, traditions and institutions. Membership of the Commonwealth is compatible with the freedom of member governments to be non-aligned or to belong to any other grouping, association or alliance.

Within this diversity all members of the Commonwealth hold certain principles in common. It is by pursuing these principles that the Commonwealth can continue to influence international society for the benefit of mankind.

WE BELIEVE that international peace and order are essential to the security and prosperity of mankind; we therefore support the United Nations and seek to strengthen its influence for peace in the world, and its efforts to remove the causes of tension between nations.

WE BELIEVE in the liberty of the individual, in equal rights for all citizens regardless of race, colour, creed or political belief, and in their inalienable right to participate by means of free and democratic political processes in framing the society in which they live. We therefore strive to promote in each of our countries those representative institutions and guarantees for personal freedom under the law that are our common heritage.

WE RECOGNISE racial prejudice as a dangerous sickness threatening the healthy development of the human race and racial discrimination as an unmitigated evil of society. Each of us will vigorously combat this evil within our own nation. No country will afford to regimes which practise racial discrimination assistance which is its own judgment directly contributes to the pursuit or consolidation of this evil policy. We oppose all forms of colonial domination and racial oppression and are committed to the principles of human dignity and equality. We will therefore use all our efforts to foster human equality and dignity everywhere and to further the principles of self-determination and non-racialism.

WE BELIEVE that the wide disparities in wealth now existing between different sections of mankind are too great to be tolerated; they also create world tensions; our aim is their progressive removal; we therefore seek to use our efforts to overcome poverty, ignorance and disease, in raising standards of life and achieving a more equitable international society. To this end our aim is to achieve the freest possible flow of international trade on terms fair and equitable to all, taking into account the special requirements of the developing countries, and to encourage the flow of adequate resources, including governmental and private resources, to the developing countries, bearing in mind the importance of doing this in a true spirit of partnership and of establishing for this purpose in the developing countries conditions which are conducive to sustained investment and growth.

WE BELIEVE that international co-operation is essential to remove the causes of war, promote tolerance, combat injustice and secure development amongst the peoples of the world; we are convinced that the Commonwealth is one of the most fruitful associations for these purposes.

In pursuing these principles the members of the Commonwealth believe that they can provide a constructive example of the multinational approach which is vital to peace and progress in the modern world. The association is based on consultation, discussion and co-operation. In rejecting coercion as an instrument of policy they recognise that the security of each member state from external aggression is a matter of concern to all members. It provides many channels for continuing exchanges of knowledge and views on professional, cultural, economic, legal and political issues among member states. These relationships we intend to foster and extend for we believe that our multi-national association can expand human understanding and understanding among nations, assist in the elimination of discrimination based on differences of race, colour or creed, maintain and strengthen person liberty, contribute to the enrichment of life for all, and provide a powerful influence for peace among nations.

3.48 p.m.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, we thank the noble Earl for repeating that Statement, and I am bound to say, in agreeing with the last part of it, referring to the importance and the strength of feeling of the Commonwealth, that it is indeed evidence of its strength that it has so far withstood the efforts of the Prime Minister.

First, however, I should like to say a word of congratulation personally to the Prime Minister on surviving his very arduous journey. I think we ought not to underestimate the strain that was placed upon him. But, I am afraid, having said that, that most of my congratulatory remarks come to an end, except in regard to the entirely proper tribute to the work of British troops, with which I am sure the whole House will agree.

It is always difficult to read such a Statement when it is thrust into one's hand at the last moment, and the noble Earl got through it very well. But I should like to make two or three short comments and to ask one question. Although we may be misled, I am inclined to receive this Statement with some relief.

LORD SHEPHERD

Hear, hear!

LORD SHACKLETON

It appears that while the Prime Minister is reserving the position of the Government—and we all accept that the independence of the British Government is a matter for the British Government and the British people—it seems as if there is perhaps some re-thinking, and it may well be almost better to say nothing about it but to let the process go on. None the less, there are one or two points that I would raise.

I agree with the Prime Minister when he points out the difference between the old Commonwealth Conference and the new, and the regrettable tendency to release public statements. I am bound to say that the Prime Minister seems to have matched it fairly well by a great deal of private briefing of his own opinions on some of these statements. I cannot say that that has contributed to good Commonwealth feeling. Of course, the crucial issue is what the decision is going to be on arms for South Africa, and it now appears that the gap between what appeared to be the Government's interpretation of the Simonstown Agreement and that which we were advised was the correct interpretation when we were in office is not so great as we at one time feared.

I should like to ask the noble Earl when in fact we shall have this White paper from the Attorney General. In this connection it would have helped us all, and would still help us, if we had some idea in rather more precise terms as to the type of arms that the Government were contemplating, or are still contemplating, or hesitating about, exporting to South Africa. The Statement talks about "replacement", and I take it that this will exclude Nimrod aircraft, and will exclude presumably new frigates, so that it really comes down to the question of helicopters. The noble Earl will be aware that the previous Government did in fact say in 1969 that they were not going to export helicopters, and this led not to a demand that we fulfil the Simonstown Agreement but that the Simonstown Agreement in this respect might be renegotiated. It may be that we shall be getting some clarification of this matter. It would be helpful to know when we are to have the White Paper.

I would also ask the noble Earl whether he is contemplating—and we should discuss this through the usual channels—an early debate on the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth Conference. It is, of course, tragic that so much of the time of the Conference was devoted to this problem of South African arms. I would also ask the noble Earl whether the Prime Minister succeeded in convincing anybody else of the dangers which he foresees in the Indian Ocean, as opposed to the dangers which most of the Commonwealth, the United States of America and others, foresee from the export of arms to South Africa and the threat to the peace of Africa as a result.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, as we have had quite a long supplementary statement from the noble Lord, may I answer it straight away? I must say that I am grateful to him for his expression of sympathy with the Prime Minister and his pleasant references to the great physical strain of a very long trip of this nature and such an arduous Conference. I should also like to express gratitude to him for the words he has spoken, and which I am sure we all endorse in your Lordships' House, about the contribution which our Armed Forces are making worldwide, be it in Cyprus, which the Prime Minister visited, or in South-East Asia.

In answer to the noble Lord's specific questions, all I can say about the White Paper is that it will be published shortly. I understand "shortly" to mean in the near future, and that will be a matter of days, I think, rather than weeks. I cannot go further than that. I think the White Paper, which deals with complex legal and political issues, should be allowed to speak for itself and should thereafter be debated. I would not wish to be led on to the ground of the White Paper, and I think it would be quite wrong to debate it by way of exchanges across the Floor of your Lordships' House.

So far as the supply of helicopters is concerned, I would only remind the noble Lord opposite that it was in March. 1965, that a senior official of the Foreign Office, Sir Geoffrey Harrison, writing on behalf of the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont, confirmed that Her Majesty's Government were prepared to supply additional Wasp helicopters to meet South African naval requirements, and explained their decision by reference to the Simonstown Agreement; and in fact four further helicopters were supplied in 1965; that is, in the lifetime of the last Administration.

Having said that, I should like to say straight away in reply to the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition that if there is a general demand and a feeling that this and the wider issues involved could usefully be debated at an early date in your Lordships' House, I am quite certain that suitable arrangements can be made through the usual channels. I should have thought that the ventilation of these great issues would be desirable, if that is indeed the feeling of your Lordships' House as a whole.

LORD BYERS

My Lords, I should like to endorse the suggestion that has been made that we should debate this matter at a suitable opportunity, if only to find out how many more skeletons there are in the cupboard that the House should know about. May I associate myself with the views expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton? One must sympathise with the Prime Minister in having to go to a conference which was conducted very largely by Press handout. I should like to ask whether the Government are going to take the initiative in suggesting to the Commonwealth Secretariat that a lot of deep thought should go into the way in which these Conferences are conducted in the future. If they continue to be conducted in this way, the Conference system in the Commonwealth is bound to break down.

There are many of us who feel that Commonwealth relations have been bedevilled by the error of judgment by the Government, immediately after the Election, announcing the sale of arms to South Africa. Even at this stage, may I make an appeal to the Government to make it clear that we cannot go on bedevilling Commonwealth relations month after month in this way. If the Indian Ocean and the South Atlantic are in jeopardy, it is not a matter for the British Government and the South African Government; it is a matter for the West as a whole. I would plead with the Government that they get rid of this haunting fear in the Commonwealth that we are going to sell arms to an apartheid Government.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I should like straight away to say that I find myself in very considerable agreement with what the noble Lord, Lord Byers, said in the first part of his statement. I believe that, given the size of the Commonwealth—31 independent countries were represented at Singapore—a great deal of attention is needed to the organisation of Commonwealth affairs, and specifically a conference of this sort. I am sure that this will be a matter which will engage the attention, not only of Her Majesty's Government and the Commonwealth Secretariat but also the other Commonwealth countries, as the feelings the noble Lord expressed were not only the feeling of the British delegation at Singapore but those of a great many other Commonwealth countries represented there.

I do not think the noble Lord would expect me to endorse all the sentiments which he expressed in the last part of the questions which he addressed to me. All I would say is that the fact is that eight Powers have agreed to join the Study Group on the question of the Indian Ocean, and this is surely in itself a recognition of the fact that the problems of that area are thought to be problems by countries other than Her Majesty's Government.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether he is aware that most people in this country are particularly grateful to the Prime Minister for the combined moderation and firmness with which he has upheld British interests at this Conference, with patient consistency on land and, so far as one can judge from Press photographs, with every kind of gallantry at sea? Since the question of skeletons has been raised, may I ask my noble friend whether he does not think that perhaps a useful by-product of these Conferences may be that they afford the subjects of a tyrannical ruler who really does practise racial oppression an opportunity to get rid of him during his absence?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I find myself in considerable sympathy with what the noble Earl has said, at least in all save that I should not wish to comment on his last sentence or two. I feel that he was speaking for, I suspect, a majority of the people of this country in the tribute which he has just paid to my right honourable friend the Prime Minister.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Earl a question which I think has an important bearing on this whole subject; namely, is it, or is it not, the fact that the French have sold 70 Mirage-Milan aircraft to the South African Republic during the last few days?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I am not certain of the precise quantities, but it is certainly a fact that the French are in the process of supplying large quantities of arms to South Africa.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask whether, with a view to saving the Commonwealth, Her Majesty's Government would agree to postpone any decision regarding the sale of arms to South Africa until there has been a Report from the Committee which has been established at Singapore to consider the security of the trade routes in the Indian Ocean?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I will, of course, take careful note of what the noble Lord has said, but it would be quite wrong for me to go beyond the terms of the Prime Minister's Statement which I have just repeated, and which made it clear that, if requested, Her Majesty's Government would feel themselves to be under a legal obligation to supply at least certain categories of arms.

LORD ALPORT

My Lords, may I ask the Leader of the House whether, in view of the fact that the recent happenings in Uganda represent the beginning of a further penetration of Russian influence down the Nile Valley into the centre of Africa, the Study Group on the defence of the Indian Ocean will include a study of the strategic needs of Central Africa and of Commonwealth countries in that part of the world?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, my noble friend has put to me an interesting question. I am afraid that I do not know the answer to it, but I will try to find out whether the Study Group's terms of reference do extend as far as that, and will communicate with my noble friend.

THE EARL OF DUDLEY

My Lords, following upon the question of the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, may I ask whether the noble Earl can say whether the French Government have given any undertaking to their own people or to the African States that the Mirage jets will not be used by the South African Government to support anti-apartheid policies or to promote racialist policies; and secondly, whether there have been any representations or protests from African States associated with the French Government as a result of the sale of jets?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, here again I take note of what my noble Friend has said. I am not aware of the precise position here and, because this is delicate ground, it would be only right for me not to "chance my arm". But I will find out what is the answer to my noble friend's question and will communicate with him.

BARONESS WHITE

My Lords, will the Leader of the House do his utmost to expedite the issue of the White Paper? I am sure he will agree that it will be difficult to debate the matter intelligently unless we can distinguish clearly between the policy of Her Majesty's Government in relation to aid and succour to the South African Government and what they consider to be a legal obligation, which of course is quite contrary to the advice given to those of us who had the honour to be members of the last Administration.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I have considerable sympathy with the point which the noble Baroness has just put to me. I will certainly see that her representations are passed on to those concerned.

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, would the noble Earl not agree that the letter to which he referred, written to my noble friend Lord Chalfont in 1955, was sent prior to the passing of a resolution at the United Nations on which the previous Administration's decision was made not to supply arms to South Africa? Secondly, would the noble Earl not agree that as a consequence of the Prime Ministers' Conference there are two issues which the House would, I think, like to consider, perhaps in isolation. First, there is the question of arms to South Africa—and here I would agree that perhaps that would be better left until the White Paper has been issued, although, if I may express a personal view, it is a debate that I hope we shall never have to embark upon. But there is a perhaps wider and even more important question, as to what is the future of the Commonwealth. What have the Government in mind in regard to the future of the Commonwealth? This may be a subject that this House would wish to debate as a separate issue, perhaps at an early date.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, so far as the letter from Sir Geoffrey Harrison is concerned, the noble Lord may be right. I would only point out that that letter was written after the 1963 and 1964 Security Council resolutions had been passed, on which our representative at the United Nations was most careful to reserve our position, reserving the right of Her Majesty's Government to sell those arms to South Africa which we held to be necessary for her own external defence. The exact context of the debate, if we are going to have a debate on the wider or the narrower issue here, is a matter which I think could usefully be pursued and that this could be done straight away through the usual channels.

LORD KILBRACKEN

My Lords, can the noble Earl explain how helicopters can be of any use whatever in keeping open the trade routes in the Indian Ocean against large, heavily armed Russian men-o'-war?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, this is not a Defence debate, and I therefore do not wish to give a lecture on Defence matters. All I should wish to point out to the noble Lord is that the helicopter is universally held to be one of the most important weapons of anti-submarine defence in the armoury of any Navy in the world to-day.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

My Lords, may I ask one question, namely, is not one of the main lessons to be learned from this Conference the fact that member States of the Commonwealth must expect, and must receive, the absolute right to manage their own policies in their own way? That was what was envisaged by the 1926 Resolution. If member States insist on interfering in the affairs of other member States, the Commonwealth cannot, in my view, survive.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, those are entirely my views. I think that one of the most important achievements of this Commonwealth Conference is that that has been recognised, not only for the other members of the Commonwealth themselves but also for Her Majesty's Government.

LORD MERRIVALE

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend one question regarding the survey of the Indian Ocean trade routes? Can he say whether the Malagasy Republic will be consulted during this survey, in view of the strategic position of Madagascar and also of the fact that Diego-Suarez, in North Madagascar, is one of the finest natural ports in that area?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I entirely take my noble friend's point about Diego-Suarez. These are early days yet, and I am quite certain that the Study Group have yet to decide how they will carry out their studies; but I will see that the noble Lord's remarks on this matter are fully represented to Her Majesty's Government.

LORD LEATHERLAND

My Lords, a simple question. May I ask the noble Earl whether, when the Government issue their White Paper, there will be incorporated in it the text of the Simonstown Agreement? Is he aware that when I read the text of that Agreement I observed that it required us to provide 20 vessels and that the South Africans were to pay £18 million for them? Furthermore, is it not a fact that we did provide those 20 vessels, and were paid the £18 million? And did not that conclude the contract?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, if it were as simple as that it might not be necessary to issue a White Paper. However, I think the Simonstown Agreement is freely available. It is a perfectly public document, and I should have thought it was not necessary to lengthen what I suspect may already be a fairly lengthy White Paper by attaching a document whose contents are already well known. I will certainly pass on the noble Lord's suggestion, but that is my off-the-cuff reaction.

BARONESS WHITE

My Lords, could the noble Earl pursue that a little further? It was a Command Paper issued in 1955. Is he certain that it is still in print?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I am not certain that it is still in print, but I have said I will look into it, and that is one of the points I will look into.

LORD LEATHERLAND

My Lords, may I press the noble Earl to publish the text of the Simonstown Agreement, if only because two separate sets of Law Officers, advising two separate Governments, have given two separate interpretations as to what the Agreement means?

BARONESS GAITSKELL

My Lords, would not the noble Earl agree that, while taking British interests always into account, one thing that has not emerged from the Commonwealth Conference is that the whole of the Commonwealth have a fear and terror about apartheid? Surely this is one of the things that also should have emerged from the Conference?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I must confess that I do not entirely agree with the noble Baroness. I should have thought that the fears about apartheid and the views that are entertained about it, were made crystal clear at the Singapore Conference. The views of Her Majesty's Government in condemning apartheid have of course been made crystal clear on many occasions, including the Singapore Conference.