My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

No, My Lords, the Security Council of the United Nations is well aware of the United States position on the importation of strategic materials which was debated in the Security Council at the end of February, and also of the attitude which South Africa and Portugal adopt towards United Nations mandatory sanctions.

My Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that reply, may I ask whether these are not open violations and illicit subversions of mandatory sanctions, making the Security Council farcical? Is she aware that the American Military Procurement Act permits not only chrome to come into America but 72 products, including copper, asbestos, manganese and nickel? Is she aware that 15,000 tons of chrome have been imported and that this is relatively little towards the demands of the Defence Department?

My Lords, so far as the U.S.A. action on the import of strategic materials is concerned, it is of course a matter for the U.S.A. Government. I understand that the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has voted for the reimposition of the ban on the import of strategic materials and that this is to be considered by the U.S. Senate.

My Lords, is it not a fact that sanctions are being breached by a number of other nations besides those mentioned in this Question? Is it not time that this farce, as the noble Lord called it, was brought to an end?

My Lords, it is perfectly true that there has been a massive evasion of sanctions. I do not think that we can single out, in the terms of the Question, one particular country which has upheld sanctions very well and which has now made only a limited relaxation.

My Lords, is there not a case for a Security Council investigation as well as any investigation in America? Is the noble Baroness aware that there is now evidence of a sinister arrangement between two great American companies, the Foote Mineral Company and United Corbide—

Carbide.

My Lords, I am interested in the fact that those on the Benches opposite know the correct name. I am referring to an arrangement by these companies to transfer dollars to their Rhodesian subsidiaries to subvert these sanctions. Is the noble Baroness aware that Lyndon Johnson declined to accept that, but that President Nixon has now accepted it?

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that, whatever the merits of that question, it does not conceivably arise out of the Question on the Order Paper? Why on earth should we draw the attention of the Security Council to matters of which it has as much knowledge as we have?

My Lords, I agree with what my noble friend has said, because the Question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, is between the Security Council and the Governments concerned.

My Lords, is the noble Baroness not aware that we are the members of the security Council, that we have a special responsibility in this matter and that this is a Question which it is entirely appropriate to ask in this House?

My Lords, it is perfectly appropriate to raise the Question, but the question put by my noble friend was also perfectly correct: this is a matter between the Security Council and the Governments concerned. So far as we are concerned, we do from time to time give notice of any commercial infringements that we believe have taken place, but we do not make any definite accusations to the Security Council.

My Lords, since France, Germany and Japan trade freely with Rhodesia, is it not a little unfair that they should not be included in so good a commercial advertisement?

My Lords, so far as this country is concerned, we continue to carry out our obligations under the Security Council Resolution No. 221.

My Lords, is not the important point to make quite clear the fact that there is no departure on the part of Her Majesty's Government from the policy of observing mandatory sanctions?

My Lords, that was exactly what I have just said.

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend what purpose she believes Her Majesty's Government are fulfilling by carrying out this policy almost single-handed? Would it not be much better to recognise the facts for what they are and seek to terminate the policy?

My Lords, we are carrying out our obligations as requested by the United Nations. Were all other countries to carry out their obligations in the same manner, sanctions would be much more effective.