§ 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 any representation has been made to the Government of the South African Republic regarding the appointment of Dr. Cael de Wet as Ambassador to the United Kingdom.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I thank the noble Marquess for that Answer. While in ordinary circumstances one would not object to any representative of another country, may I ask him to agree that this man's record is such that we should not welcome him as an Ambassador? Is he not merely an advocate of apartheid but a diehard supporter of it, with an intolerable record which is appalling?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, the House will be aware of some of the things that Dr. de Wet has been alleged to have said. However, I would remind the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, that Dr. de Wet has been Ambassador here under both Conservative and Labour Administrations in the last four or five years. So far as I know, he has carried out his duties with distinction and discretion, and we see no reason in this case to make any objection to his appointment.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while I appreciate what the noble Marquess has said—because Dr. de Wet was Ambassador here between 1964 and 1966—is it not the case that since then he has made state- 1812 ments to the effect, for example, that the Sabotage Act in South Africa is too mild when it allows the death sentence? Is it not a fact that he wants to suppress all opposition newspapers? Does the noble Marquess consider it desirable that we should welcome such an Ambassador from another country?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, whatever opinions Dr. de Wet may or may not have expressed in the past few years, I feel certain that he has sufficient experience appropriate to his position as Ambassador, and for that reason I must tell the noble Lord that what I said in my original Answer must stand.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, would an Ambassador be any use at all if he did not represent the views of his Government and the way of life in his country? Is my noble friend aware that a great many people will welcome Dr. de Wet's appointment and should meet him and get to know him, instead of, by implication, criticising him when he is about to take up office?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANYes, my Lords, and a great many people will recall Dr. de Wet's last term of office as Ambassador. Many of us got to know him well and, as I have said, he fulfilled his duties then with distinction. I do not see any reason to suppose that he will not do so again.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, is there not an anomaly between our welcoming this Ambassador and our repeated statements in the Human Rights Commission at the United Nations that we abhor apartheid? Is it not a fact that we always preface our remarks about South Africa by saying that we abhor apartheid?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, certainly we abhor apartheid, and the Government have always said so. However, I do not think that that makes any difference to what I said about the position of Dr. de Wet as Ambassador.