HC Deb 20 April 1967 vol 745 cc151-2W
Q15. Mr. Biggs-Davison

asked the Prime Minister which member of the Government is responsible to Crown and Parliament for the affairs of the Reserve Bank of Rhodesia.

The Prime Minister

In so far as they are proper to Ministers, Questions on the activities of the Bank are for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Formal responsibility for legislation affecting the Bank is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary.

Sir W. Robson Brown

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement setting out the terms of the Tiger talks to show how far he went to meet Mr. Smith, in view of next Saturday's special congress meeting in Salisbury, when irrevocable decisions may be made; and if he will give precise rebuttals to the Rhodesian Front's misinterpretations, particularly during the four months' transition period, so that the citizens of Rhodesia, both white and African, can evaluate their future without distortion or misrepresentation.

The Prime Minister

The House will have formed its own judgment on the value of Rhodesia Front statements, but the facts of the matter were clearly set out in the Command Paper (Cmnd. 3171) entitled "Documents Relating to Proposals for a Settlement, 1966" and in my own statements in the House on 8th and 20th December, 1966. I am, however, grateful for this opportunity to refute the attempts made by the illegal regime to argue that the Working Document would have enabled us to use the armed forces or police during or after the transitional period to overbear the legal government of Rhodesia set up in accordance with the "Tiger" proposals. It would not in fact have been feasible to do this within the "Tiger" proposals, and in any case Mr. Smith was well aware that we had no wish to do it. The rejection of those proposals has created a new situation, in which we have declared that we could not now submit to Parliament any settlement which involved independence before majority rule; but this of course does not mean that we have altered our view that a substantial period of preparation will be required before majority rule can be reached.