§ 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 whether they have indicated to the illegal Administration in Rhodesia that they will be prepared to implement the Agreement, reported by the Pearce Commission to be rejected by the people as a whole, if "responsible" African opinion should endorse it.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, there is no truth in Press reports that Her Majesty's Government have indicated to the Rhodesian authorities the conditions on which they would consider the Fifth Principle satisfied in the future.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I thank the Minister and I am reassured by his reply. May I ask him whether there have not been two significant developments since a similar Question was asked last week: first, the statement of Sir Roy Welensky, the ex-Federal Prime Minister, on returning to Rhodesia after discussions at Cabinet level in this country, in which he is reported to have said that Britain needs positive proof that there is support for the proposals from responsible applicants, and secondly, the action of the illegal Administration in bringing pressure to bear on the salaried tribal chiefs to reverse the decision of the African people?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I have seen the report of what 222 Sir Roy Welensky said on his return to Rhodesia, and I can only repeat that there have been no official exchanges with the Rhodesians on these matters recently. It is true that Ministers in this country have seen visiting people from Rhodesia, but in no sense have there been any emissaries, either official or unofficial. I hope that my original Answer will reassure the noble Lord. I am afraid that I cannot comment on the second point he raised, but I will take note of it.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, having regard to the fact that it is impossible to govern or even to influence a country 6,000 miles away if you have not the power and the will, may I ask my noble friend whether it would not be better to talk with Rhodesia, and for that matter with South Africa as well, instead of trying to win a war which nobody can win?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think that in the debate on the Pearce Commission Report my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and also my noble friend Lady Tweeds-muir of Belhelvie made it perfectly plain that these proposals were still on the table and that there should be a period of reflection, and that if the Rhodesian authorities wished to talk about them again we should be pleased to discuss the matter.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the reply which the noble Marquess gave to my noble friend is very reassuring, but could the noble Marquess confirm that on no occasion has any Cabinet Minister or official given to Sir Roy Welensky any impression that Her Majesty's Government have in mind the opinions of responsible Rhodesians as being the sole criteria in a decision on this matter? Could the noble Marquess confirm and assure the House that in any future contacts with Rhodesia, either officially or unofficially, the Government will make clear that the Fifth Principle is consultation and agreement by the people of Rhodesia as a whole?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANYes, my Lords, I think I can give the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, that assurance on those matters.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, accepting what the Minister has said, that 223 there has been no official emissary, is it not a disgrace that discussions have taken place with Sir Roy Welensky and others? They have indicated that they have no authority to approach the illegal Administration in Rhodesia, but nevertheless have made their views known following those discussions, and even indicated that they were the views of the British Government?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think that in any discussions that Sir Roy and others have had with members of the British Government they have expressed their own opinions. We have seen in The Times report that what Sir Roy said was his own opinion when he got back to Rhodesia after visiting this country. But I can still assure the noble Lord that there has been absolutely no official emissary, or even an unofficial emissary discussing these matters, and I would refer to what I said in my original Answer.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is right that Her Majesty's Government should be cross-examined on Press reports from every different place in the world about matters for which the Government have no responsibility?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I am grateful for what my noble friend has said. While I cannot comment on Press reports, I think that in this instance they had some relevance to the situation.
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, is the noble Marquess aware that there were so many inspired leaks from the Government and the Press that everybody is suspicious of Press reports?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I do not think there was any question of inspired leaks on this occasion.
§ LORD HANKEYMy Lords, do the Government realise that most people would be heartily glad to see an end to this question, and some sort of settlement reached? Would they consider establishing contact with the Government or régime in Rhodesia by diplomatic means, so that these things might be discussed with a view to reaching a solution?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I will pass on to my right honourable friend what the noble Lord has said.