HL Deb 21 May 1982 vol 430 cc875-7

11.7 a.m.

Lord Brockway

My 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 will report on the condition of the negotiations for the independence of Namibia.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, Foreign Ministers of the Five met in Luxembourg on Monday, 17th May, to review their continuing efforts to achieve an early settlement of the Namibia problem in accordance with Security Council Resolution 435.

With permission I shall circulate the text of their communique in the Official Report.

Following is the communique referred to:

NAMIBIA: COMMUNIQUÈ ISSUED BY FOREIGN MINISTERS OF THE FIVE, LUXEMBOURG, 17 MAY 1982

The Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the UK and the USA met in Luxembourg on 17 May 1982 to pursue their efforts to achieve an early settlement of the problem of Namibia in accordance with Security Council Resolution 435.

The Ministers noted the replies received from the parties concerned to the Five's proposal for constitutional principles for the Namibian constituent assembly. In the light of these replies, Ministers instructed their officials to accelerate the resolution of outstanding issues with a view to maintaining their target of beginning implementation of UNSCR 435 during 1982. They expect soon to present proposals to the parties concerned notably on impartiality and UNTAG.

They stressed the need for positive and flexible responses to these proposals when they are presented, in order to achieve early implementation of UNSCR 435.

The Ministers agreed to keep under review additional negotiating mechanisms which might prove useful as matters develop.

Lord Brockway

My Lords, I am really asking for a little more information. Is it not the case that agreement has been reached on four points: the cease-fire; the withdrawal of forces to their bases; a United Nations Transitional Assurance Group; and the release of political prisoners and the return of refugees? Is it not the case that the disagreement now concerns the electoral system by which there will be a double vote—one direct to individuals and the other by proportional representation?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I confirm what the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, has said; namely, that disagreement rests at the moment upon the electoral system and that of course SWAPO have not accepted the proposals which at the moment have been put forward. But there is also a need for the Five to put proposals forward on impartiality and on the United Nations Transitional Assistance Group. The Five expect soon to present these proposals.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, to what extent does the noble Lord regard the disagreement over a system of election as a serious obstacle? Is not this something which should be resolved fairly quickly? As I recall, the noble Earl, Lord Avon, when he replied to a debate on this matter on, I think, 17th March, indicated that it might be possible to make some reasonable progress on this very question. It seems most unfortunate that this very important problem should go unresolved, when it is a matter upon which it should be possible to come to an agreement. Secondly, it was hoped at one stage that free elections would take place on 1st March 1983. Do Her Majesty's Government think that this is still a possibility?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, the question of the electoral system is still under active consideration by the Five in the light of comments received, including the comments of the Front Line States' Foreign Ministers' Communiqué which was made in Dar es Salaam on 4th May. I cannot at this stage forecast the outcome, but I should like to reply to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, by saying that the Five do not foresee a breakdown of negotiations on this point.

So far as making further progress is concerned, we believe that the parties wish the Five to continue their efforts, and we hope that all the parties will recognise the need for a positive response in order to achieve early implementation of Security Council Resolution 435 when the proposals are presented to the parties shortly.

Lord Paget of Northampton

My Lords, is not the problem here really the same as the problem with the Falkland Islands? SWAPO, like the Argentine, however much we dress up the terms, require a guarantee that will result in SWAPO's sovereignty, and that they could not obtain by any fair means.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, there is a similarity in that there is a resolution of the Security Council. I hope that in this case, as in the other, the Security Council resolution will be carried out.

Lord Brockway

My Lords, are the Government prepared to give earnest reconsideration to the electoral proposals? Are they not very complex—involving long lists of names—to Africans, many of whom are illiterate? Is not the only place where this is in operation West Germany, which knows something about it from long training, but everywhere else there is no knowledge of this complicated system at all?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I think that the thing to do now is to wait for the proposals which the Five expect to present soon to the parties concerned, and to see what is the response of the parties concerned.