asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what authority he now recognises as having control of Rhodesian Railways, now the Rhodesian section is split from the Zambian.

The Rhodesia Railways, set up in 1963 as a body corporate for Southern Rhodesia and Northern Rhodesia—now Zambia—jointly, has not been dissolved. While the Zambian and Southern Rhodesian sections of the Rhodesia Railways have been operated as two distinct sections since 30th June this year, the assets and liabilities of the Railways remain vested in the original body corporate, which is still jointly owned by the lawful Government of Southern Rhodesia and the Government of Zambia.

Is not this something that ought to be talked about, if only from the point of view of pensioners? May I express the hope that the Secretary of State will prolong his stay to clear up these kind of points, as the pensions aspect is very important?

I know that the House will wish my right hon. Friend fair weather and godspeed in the journey which he will make today, but I can give no assurance on the other part of the question.

From that reply, does my right hon. Friend say that the Government of Great Britain, which is the lawful Government of Rhodesia, are responsible for these pensions and debts and will pay them?

I said that we are responsible.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the effect of the sanctions campaign against Rhodesia and on the constitutional position in that country.

On the basis of the réegime's own figures for 1966, the effect of "voluntary" sanctions was to reduce Rhodesian exports from £164·7 million in 1965 to £104·7 million in 1966 and imports from £119·8 million in 1965 to £84·2 million in 1966.

May I offer my congratulations to the Secretary of State on the assumption of his very important office? He carries with him the good will of this side of the House. Is the Minister of State aware that sanctions will not bring down the Smith Government and that a compromise could be reached on the basis of the "Tiger" constitution if the Government would only drop their insistence on their formula for a return to legality? Is it the Secretary of State's intention to try to seek a settlement by compromise when he visits Salisbury?

I presume that the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question proper was wishful thinking, when he said that sanctions would not succeed. There is no evidence yet. Mandatory sanctions have not been running for one year yet and it is much too early to reach a decision.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that, contrary to reports, the present embargo on exports from Rhodesia covers nickel exports and nickel products?

No, Sir.

When will the Government come out of cloud-cuckoo-land and realise that sanctions are not realistically working? I advise the Minister to go to France and ask people there what is happening. It is nonsense. Is he forgetting entirely what the Prime Minister told the House in the early days about the effect of sanctions?

It is not for me to deny the authority of the hon. Gentleman on cloud-cuckoo-land: he might know more about it than me. Sanctions are having a very serious effect on the external trade of Rhodesia, and we take no joy in that. We want a settlement on honourable terms.

Will my hon. Friend reaffirm that the Government's policy of not granting independence to Rhodesia before majority rule remains unchanged? In the meantime, will he assure the House that, where necessary, all effective steps will be taken to increase the efficiency of sanctions?

We are constantly looking at the question of the effectiveness of sanctions. There is a Question to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister today on the question of not granting independence before majority rule.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made, or other action taken, regarding the use of Zambian and Tanzanian soil by terrorists invading Rhodesia.

The British Government's views on terrorism and unconstitutional action are well known to all Commonwealth countries. As the House will be aware, the British Government have recently reiterated their concern to the Zambian Government.

Do Her Majesty's Government accept full responsibility for the integrity of Rhodesian territory against agression from outside? If so, may we be assured that no taxpayers' money will pass from the United Kingdom to either of these two Governments while there is any question of terrorist invasions being launched from their territories?

I think the hon. Member is making a wrong approach to this very difficult problem. Rhodesia is in a state of rebellion against Her Majesty's Government, and I wish that we had had rather more support in the months gone by from the hon. Member in seeking to end the rebellion and restoring constitutional progress. It would not be sensible to deal with the matter in the way that the hon. Member suggests. The question of British aid to countries in Africa is of great importance in itself, and there is no reason to believe that stopping aid would have the results that the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that while most hon. Members regret the use of these forces which are bringing suffering to women and children, the responsibility lies with the present Government in not imposing effective sanctions against Rhodesia, which has left the African people no other remedy than to take the matter into their own hands?

No, I cannot agree with that either. Her Majesty's Government have imposed sanctions in a way that has had much greater effect than has been generally accepted. If other countries in the international community were to do as well as we have done, greater progress would be made towards restoring peaceful and constitutional progress in Rhodesia.

In the light of the Government's attitude to terrorism, repeated this afternoon by the Secretary of State, can the right hon. Gentleman say what reply has been received to the representations made to these two Governments? Were the replies regarded as satisfactory, and, if not, what further action will the Government take?

We have received a reply from the Government of Zambia to our note, and that reply, as is customary in exchanges of this kind, remains confidential. I would not express myself as satisfied with the reply, and we are continuing to keep in close touch with the Zambian Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on recent evidence concerning trade between British firms and Rhodesia.

Recent allegations by a spokesman of the illegal regime that trade between British firms and Rhodesia in the first seven months of this year amounted to £5·9 million are untrue.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that effective means of enforcement are essential to a successful sanctions policy, and can he assure the House that there will be no hesitation on the part of the Government in bringing to justice any British business men involved in transactions of this kind?

I can give the House this very full assurance. Whenever hard evidence is obtained of United Kingdom citizens deliberately flouting the law, we shall take the strongest action.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Japanese Government are claiming 100 per cent. increase in their exports to Rhodesia this year and the Swiss a 50 per cent. increase in their imports? If British firms were allowed to follow this example, would there not be rather less unemployment and misery in Scotland and Wales this winter?

If the hon. Gentleman has any evidence of sanctions being deliberately flouted by citizens with whom we can deal, I promise that we shall take action. For the rest, he had better talk to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

May I from this bench, albeit belatedly, offer congratulations to the Secretary of State on his appointment, saying how pleased we are that a Scot is once again in control of the Commonwealth, to which, I believe, the English have made an occasional contribution? Have the Government followed through the evidence given by the Sunday Times and the television programme "World in Action" about the breaking of sanctions?

My right hon. Friend is overwhelmed by the congratulations of a fellow Scot. As a Celt, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the article in the Sunday Times, which was informative and useful, has been studied with care, as also has the programme "World in Action". The hon. Gentleman will not want me to go into details here.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what study he has given to the extent to which officially recorded United States imports from Rhodesia, amounting to $4·7 million during the first seven months of this year, included goods subject to United Nations embargo; and with what results.

I have studied these statistics with interest, and I am satisfied with the explanation given by the United States Government that goods subject to United Nations embargo such as tobacco and chrome which appear in the statistics were exported from Rhodesia before 16th December, 1966.

How much longer does the right hon. Gentleman think that this curious trade will continue in conformity with the embargo? In view of his statement, will the right hon. Gentleman seek to persuade the United States Government to set aside the proceeds of this trade to help to offset the dollar cost of additional tobacco imports from dollar sources into this country?

That is another question. I thought that the hon. Gentleman would be pleased at the agreement between the United States and ourselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what study he has given to the extent to which the 31 per cent. increase in exports from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development member countries to Angola during the first five months of this year included goods destined for Rhodesia; and with what results.

I have studied these figures with interest but have no evidence that this increase is attributable to the use of this route for goods destined for Rhodesia. Figures for imports into Zambia through Angola recently given by the Zambian Minister of Transport, Power and Communications show that, in the six months prior to I.D.I., Zambian imports through Angola amounted to only 9,253 tons, whereas in the first five months of the present year 83,154 tons were imported by this route.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider advising British firms which have lost valuable export markets to overseas competitors to use the Angola-Zambia route into Rhodesia in the future?

I do not believe, and the Government do not believe, that goods are going through Angola and Zambia to Rhodesia. Zambia has re-routed her imports, and that accounts for the increase in trade.

As everyone knows that sanctions are being breached through the port of Lourenço Marques, will Her Majesty's Government quarantine this port with the same naval vessels as are quarantining Beira?

That is a fair question, but I am in no position to give a full reply to my hon. Friend.

Having recently returned from those parts of Africa, I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement, which is factual, but does he understand that the House looks to the visit of his right hon. Friend to get a settlement of this problem, as, undoubtedly, sanctions are, one way or another, being broken by members of the United Nations?

I believe that the House and the country look to my right hon. Friend to obtain a settlement on honourable terms if possible, but he is in honour bound by the conditions which both sides of the House have accepted in the past.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what reappraisal he has made of the economic position of Malta, in view of events in the Middle East; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what plans are being made to help the Maltese economy, especially the docks; how far such plans have proceeded; and whether he will consider negotiating a treaty with Malta on the lines of the Anglo-Irish Trade Agreement.

The Report of the Joint Mission for Malta provides a valuable guide to the solution of Malta's economic problems. We have accepted in principle the findings of this Report and are already taking action on those recommendations which concern the British Government. I had useful talks with Dr. Borg Olivier, the Prime Minister of Malta, in London last week. The British and Malta Governments have agreed on the setting up of a Joint Steering Committe to follow closely and report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Joint Mission Report. I am glad to say that Lord Robens has accepted appointment as Chairman and that Professor Ross and Mr. C. M. Woodhouse have agreed to serve on it.

May I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman and wish him a very useful time in his high office? I am very glad to hear about the implementation of the Malta Report, but will he not clearly recognise that the situation in the Middle East has deteriorated yet further, that for about 5,000 people in the dockyard there is very little work, and will he give urgent attention to the special problem of Malta, continuing as long as the Suez Canal is closed?

I am very grateful to the hon. Member for his personal good wishes. I can assure him that I am giving very urgent attention to this matter. For our part we, the British Government, have made recommendations to the Malta Government on a number of matters and we are now awaiting their views. We are ready to act as soon as we can get joint agreement to move forward.

May I also offer best wishes to the right hon. Gentleman on his tour? He hardly mentioned the docks in his Answer. I therefore ask what is happening about Bailey's? Are we to go on indefinitely having this matter sub judice? It is a vital issue to the prosperity and future of Malta.

I have had talks with the Prime Minister about this very important aspect of Malta's problems but I am afraid that the present position is still that negotiations between Her Majesty's Government and Bailey (Malta) Limited are in being and I cannot comment on the legal position.

While wishing well to Malta, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to make certain that any future treaty entered into will be a better bargain for the United Kingdom than the Anglo-Eire Agreement?

We are anxious to do the right thing by Malta, to which we have old obligations.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the constitutional future of Gibraltar.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs when he proposes to call a conference to discuss the future of Gibraltar; and whom he proposes to invite.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the future constitutional position of Gibraltar in view of the recent referendum.

Mr. Speaker, may I at the outset express my gratitude to the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) for the good wishes he expressed earlier? I require all the good wishes I can get in what I am about to undertake.

I welcome the Secretary of State's statement. What will be the scope of these constitutional talks? Will they lead to a final constitutional future for the people of Gibraltar?

I do not think that one ever says "never" in these matters. We hope that there will be useful constitutional discussions. The last constitutional changes in Gibraltar took place only three years ago. The main change that we ourselves hope will be discussed is a simplification of Gibraltar's elected institutions by some form of merger between the Legislative Council and the City Council.

I fully appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman says, but he does not tell us whom he proposes to invite. For instance, will the Indian community be invited, because I think that it ought to be? Why do not we have some form of round-table conference, a concept which I understand that the Secretary of State rejected yesterday, since we did this for Malta?

I should like to look further at the question of the Indian community being invited. The Malta Round-Table Conference was a special conference held to meet exceptional circumstances. I do not think that such a round-table conference would be appropriate in this case. What I have in mind in his case, though I have not finally decided about it, is probably a conference in Gibraltar itself, which I hope would be attended by a British Minister.

Does my righ hon. Friend appreciate that Gibraltar occupies a special position as the most loyal Colony we have? Will he, therefore, accord it a special relationship between now and the conference which he is calling? Does he intend visiting Gibraltar shortly?

I would not like to draw degrees of loyalty between various of Her Majesty's territories, but we were all deeply moved in this country by the expression of affection for this country of which the result of the referendum was an example. I am proposing that these discussions should be held very early in the new year, which is not very far ahead. My hon. Friend may be assured that between now and the constitutional discussions there will be a very intimate contact between Gibraltar and ourselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Prime Minister of Malaysia during his recent visit here with regard to proposals to help Malaysia in its plans for economic development.

The previous Commonwealth Secretary's discussions with the Tunku were concerned with the rundown of our defence forces in Malaysia. In this context he referred briefly to the financial aid which we shall give the Malaysian Government to help them adjust their economy to the new situation.

Have the Government taken the opportunity to start talks with the Government of Malaysia about the economic aid that should compensate for what I regard as the premature withdrawal and reduction of British troops? Will the Secretary of State take particular care to ensure that British overseas private investment is still encouraged rather than discouraged in Malaysia?

There have been discussions recently in Malaysia on this subject, but these have been conducted through the Ministry of Overseas Development and Questions about this matter should therefore be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Prime Minister of Malaysia during his recent visit with regard to the future rôle of British forces in Malaysia vis-à-vis Indonesia.

I do not think it is helpful to speak in terms of the role of British forces against a friendly country. It was, however, made plain in the Supplementary Statement on Defence Policy following the talks with the Tunku last July that we shall honour our obligations under the Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement and consult on the way in which we should plan to meet them.

Does not the Secretary of State recognise that Britain's greatest successes in this area since the war were achieved by forces stationed on the ground in Malaysia and working with the Malaysian forces and with the people of Malaysia? Does he not recognise that to have forces that can be flown in or sent in on carriers at short notice is no substitute for having those forces on the spot in Malaysia?

No, Sir; I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. The Tunku has expressed himself as satisfied with the proposed deployment. It is proposed that by the early 1970s British forces there will consist largely of naval forces, including an amphibious element, and air forces. These highly specialised and technical forces will sensibly complement the Malaysians' own ground troops, which they can operate far more economically than we can and which they are expanding.

For how long is it intended to maintain air support in Eastern Malaysia?

That question should be directed to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what assistance is provided in Scotland by Her Majesty's Government to emigration officials from Commonwealth countries.

None, Sir. The migration offices set up in Edinburgh and Glasgow by the Canadian and Australian Governments are operated by officials of the respective governmental migration services without any assistance from Her Majesty's Government.

Is the Minister aware that this assistance is not necessary because unfortunately the policies of the present Government and the ineffectiveness of the Secretary of State for Scotland are causing a substantial increase in emigration from Scotland?

The longstanding belief of successive British Governments has been that the flow of British migrants to other parts of the Commonwealth has been of value to all concerned, and a source of strength and unity to the Commonwealth as a whole. I would have thought the hon. Gentleman would have been proud of the contribution that his fellow countrymen are making to the Commonwealth.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs how many Nigerian students in the United Kingdom have been reported to his Department as being placed in financial difficulties as a result of events in Nigeria; and what arrangements he has been able to make to enable them to continue their studies.

Up to 9th October, 29 applications for financial assistance had been received by the area offices of the Supplementary Benefits Commission, Ministry of Social Security, from Nigerian students who are in financial difficulties. About a dozen similar cases have been brought to the attention of my Department and students are being advised that they can claim supplementary benefit on condition of registering for employment. Many of these students came here to study at their own expense and it is not possible for the British Government to provide funds for them to continue their studies. I am, however, in touch with the Nigerian High Commissioner about this problem.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that the way in which Mr. Charles Umeh, a Biafran, has been shunted about between the British Council and the Ministry of Social Security, with very little help being given, is most disappointing? Surely Commonwealth students in this country, at a time when their own country is torn by civil war, deserve more help than they seem to be getting at the moment?

I will look into the case which my hon. Friend has raised. On the second point, it must be borne in mind that there are limits to what the British taxpayer—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—I do not want any cheers from the other side of the House. There are limits and, therefore, we must ensure that proper inquiries are made.

Would the Minister of State confirm that when on 20th July I asked him a similar question he said that there had been few requests. Even now there are only 29, which is a very small number. Will he see that his answer is well advertised? Also will he confirm that at last the Federal Government have decided to pay the pensions of British civil servants, for the payment of whose pensions the Eastern Regional Government are responsible?

That latter point is another matter. However, I hope that publicity will be given to the figures that I have announced.

Will my hon. Friend say whether there is not another difficulty arising in connection with this matter? Is it not true to say that some of these students who find themselves in this unfortunate position are willing to work during weekends in hospitals and such places in order to obtain some money but that there is some difficulty about work permits? Will my hon. Friend look into that point?

The question of work permits is not one for me, but I will look into the matter to see whether I can help.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made to the Zambian Government on the suitability of Mr. Simbule continuing as High Commissioner in London.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what action the Government intend to take with regard to the continued public criticisms of Her Majesty's Government by Mr. Alinan Simbule, the High Commissioner for Zambia.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. and learned Member for Antrim, South (Sir Knox Cunningham) on 23rd October.

Is it not clear from that reply that 10 weeks have elapsed since Mr. Simbule again made derogatory remarks about the British Government in London and in Nairobi? Is not the Government's attitude not so much one of tolerance but of craven indulgence, and is it not time that Mr. Simbule was sent packing?

No, I do not think so. The fact is that Mr. Simbule has not been in London since the remarks to which the hon. Member is referring were made, which is two and a half months ago, except when in transit to his present post in New York. I think it is better to leave this matter to be resolved through the normal diplomatic channels.

Is it not a fact that 10 weeks have elapsed since the Zambian Government were asked for an explanation of Mr. Simbule's latest remarks? How long do the Government propose to wait for a reply?

I think it is better to deal with this matter in the way in which it is being dealt with, through normal diplomatic channels.

Can the Minister think of another previous example of any High Commissioner or ambassador accredited here or anywhere else who has been allowed to remain in his post after expressing the kind of view and using the kind of language that Mr. Simbule has used about the Government to which he is accredited?

I appreciate the feeling on this matter, which is not confined to one side of this House or to one party, but I remind the hon. Member that Mr. Simbule has not been in his post since he left on 12th August. I think it would be in the best interests of relations between Zambia and Britain, which are of great importance, that we should deal with this matter in the way in which I am suggesting.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he has to protect British personnel and investments in Nigeria, in view of the present dispute between Biafra and the Nigerian Federal authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the situation between the Federal Government and Biafra in Nigeria as it affects British interests.

We have had to advise United Kingdom nationals, for their own safety, to leave those parts of Nigeria which have been the scene of fighting. Inevitably some British property has been at risk. We have kept in close touch with the Nigerian authorities in these matters.

Is it not clear that the vacillation of Her Majesty's Government has resulted in our having the worst of all worlds in that we are repudiated by the Biafrans and the Federal authorities? Can the right hon. Gentleman say that he is fully satisfied that the considerable British investments particularly in Biafra are not being put unnecessarily at risk?

The hon. Member is quite wrong in the assumption that he makes in the first part of that supplementary question. We have not had the worst of both worlds. We recognise the Federal military Government of Nigeria and we have operated on that basis. I have to tell the hon. Member that the reports that I have had from the Mid-West are that damage to British property there has not been extensive, but it is too early yet to make any statement about what is happening to British property in Eastern Nigeria.

As the safety of British nationals as well as the future of the country depend upon bringing the conflict to an end quickly, could my right hon. Friend say whether he has made any attempts to obtain mediation between the two sides, particularly from somebody who is trusted by the Biafrans who are dominated by their fear of a repetition of the massacre and reprisals last year?

There are other Questions on this subject and I shall, therefore, confine myself to saying that Her Majesty's Government have always been ready to do anything they can to help to end the war and start talks.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what help he has offered to Nigeria towards bringing the civil war there to an end.

We are ready to consider any proposal which the Nigerians make for our help in promoting peace talks or in any other way. I have stated this publicly outside this House as well as in private exchanges with the Federal Government.

With so many friends of Britain on both sides of this insane civil war, which is bringing great carnage and loss to all in Nigeria and to great British interests there, will the Secretary of State back up any mediation on the part of Heads of African States and also offer troops to keep the ring should there be a referendum on the frontiers of some of the new 12 States?

As one among many in this country who is an old friend of Nigeria, I warmly endorse the first words uttered by the hon. Gentleman. I assure him that, if there were any suggestion of effective help which we could give, we should certainly respond to it. We have warmly welcomed the initiative of the O.A.U. I am sorry that this has been delayed, but I understand that it is now likely to take place in the early part of November.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs (1) what economic consultations he is having with the Pakistan Government during its preparation of the third five-year plan in order that it can have a realistic appraisal of its trade with Great Britain over that period should Great Britain join the Common Market;

Consultations have taken place with the Government of Pakistan about the British application for membership of the E.E.C., but they were of a confidential nature and I do not think it would be right to disclose what was said. As regards compensation for loss of preferences, I am advised that the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade confers no rights in this respect.

I welcome my hon. Friend to his post on the Front Bench. Is he aware that if we join the Common Market, one-third of Pakistan's trade with us will go to the wall by 1970, and it will be no consolation if we give further technical assistance while at the same time destroying that country's economy? Further, is he aware that the only relief in tariffs given by the Common Market so far is on tea, which Pakistan does not export and which Europe does not drink?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his first remarks. The Pakistan five-year plan to which he refers covers the period 1965–70, and it is most unlikely that British entry into the E.E.C. would have any significant effect on Pakistan's trade during that period. My hon. Friend will know that, in the previous negotiations, agreement was reached that, after British entry into the enlarged Community, the Community would declare its willingness to negotiate a comprehensive trade agreement with Pakistan. This is one of the provisional agreements which we hope it will be possible to revive.

Does not the Minister realise that we are not going into the Common Market?

That is a personal expression of opinion.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the situation in Hong Kong.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on Hong Kong in the light of Lord Shepherd's visit there.

My noble Friend the Minister of State for Commonwealth Affairs arrived back earlier this afternoon from his visit to Hong Kong.

Is the Minister aware that the House welcomes his statement and shares his admiration for the staunch and restrained action which both the Hong Kong Government and the police force have taken in the Colony? What action are Her Majesty's Government taking to obtain the immediate release of those Hong Kong policemen, including a police inspector, who have been kidnapped and taken across the border into Red China? Can the Minister give a firm assurances that the Government will continue to give support both here and in the Colony to the actions of the Hong Kong Government during the weeks ahead?

I give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. We are in discussion at the moment with the Chinese People's Republic authorities about the senior police inspector and the other policemen who have been abducted. I did not mention that in my main statement, although it is very much in my mind, because the discussions are at a delicate stage and I think that in the best interests of getting those people back the less said at the moment the better.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his statement will give great satisfaction to the people of Hong Kong, both for the forthright assertion of British responsibility for the Colony and for correcting some unfortunate and untrue impressions given in the Press and by broadcasting in this country of a Colony whose whole life was disrupted by bomb-throwers? Is he also satisfied that the recent reforms which have been gained as a result of the Minister of State's visit can be followed up by further reforms over a wide field?

My noble Friend has just arrived back today. I have had a brief meeting with him, but he will make a full report and we shall seek to follow up his recommendations.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the outcome of his talks with the Governor of Hong Kong during His Excellency's recent visit.

My talks with the Governor covered a wide range of subjects since I was anxious to take advantage of his presence here to familiarise myself with the various Hong Kong problems. Some of these have since been pursued by my noble Friend the Minister of State for Commonwealth Affairs during his visit to the Colony from which he returns today.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in its 1956 Annual Report Hong Kong was promised a new society? In view of the splendid tribute which he has just paid to the people of Hong Kong, is it not time that they had the chance of helping to create that new society by means of the franchise?

I think that in the economic sense the people of Hong Kong have been showing an example to the rest of the world by creating a new society for themselves, which is the best way to tackle the matter. My hon. Friend knows very well from his long and intimate connection with Hong Kong that it has already been stated in the House on several occasions that because of Hong Kong's special position constitutional development towards self-government is not possible, and I have nothing further to add to that.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether, since the abdication of the last Sultan of Brunei, any changes are proposed in the treaty with that State.

No such proposals have been made.

asked the Prime Minister if he will convene a conference of trade union leaders and the appro- priate Ministers to discuss the future of the Government's incomes policy.

The prices and incomes policy now in force has been worked out with the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry, and the Government are remaining in close touch with both bodies. I see no need for a special conference.

Could the Prime Minister, as overlord of an essentially Socialist economic policy, tell the House whether he actually has evidence that the Communist Party is plotting to make a winter of disruption in this country?

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour made his statement last week with my full support, and he would not have said what he did without abundant evidence to justify it.

Has my right hon. Friend's attention been drawn to a number of companies which appear to be evading the Government's restrictions and severe restraint in that they are increasing by rather large amounts dividends which are already high? If I give him one illustration, of a 65 per cent. dividend being raised to 75 per cent., will he have it investigated?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is in close touch with this, but my hon. Friend will be aware that over the period about which we have been talking the number of reductions in profits and dividends has exceeded the number of increases.

asked the Prime Minister what progress has been made in Great Britain's negotiations to join the European Economic Community; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now state the position with regard to the British application to join the European Economic Community.

asked the Prime Minister what communications he has had with the President of France during the Recess on the subject of the entry of the United Kingdom into the European Economic Community; and what progress has been made with the United Kingdom's application.

asked the Prime Minister what progress has been made on negotiations for British entry to the Common Market.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the progress of his recent European continental talks and communications directed to Great Britain's entry into the Common Market.

Since I last reported to the House, the European Commission has prepared its Opinion on Britain's application, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Treaty of Rome. This document, which concluded that negotiations should be opened, is now being discussed at the two-day meeting of the E.E.C. Council of Ministers at Luxembourg. When that meeting is over my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will make a statement to the House. In advance of that statement, and in view of reports which have appeared about the first day's transactions in Luxembourg, I should perhaps make this clear. Our application is in and remains in. We shall not be deterred by day-to-day developments or possible disappointments. We reject some of the reported statements as ill-informed, and conclusions said to be drawn from them as unwarranted and inadmissible. We are prepared to let the facts talk. Therefore I repeat that we are ready to enter into negotiations now.

Will my right hon. Friend make it clear that our application is based upon strength and not weakness by setting a time limit of months for the consideration of our application, and, if nothing has happened by then, making it clear that we shall look elsewhere for economic and technological co-operation?

I think that the very robust attitude of the large majority of the Six makes clear their attitude to our application. I do not feel that it would serve British national purposes best by fixing any time limit. I have said that our application is in and remains in. In one sense it might be said that time is on our side, but I do not believe that time is on the side of those in Europe and Britain who want to see a much stronger technologically-based Europe with greater power to influence world events.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that our chances of gaining entry to the Common Market at this stage are very slim, and that it is humiliating for the country if we proceed with our application if there are such strong and unreasonable objections from some of the countries in the Community?

I think that for objections to be strong and unreasonable and seen to be such does not in any sense involve any humiliation for this country. I have already said what I and the Government feel about certain statements reported as having been made yesterday.

Now it is clear that our application will fail, what plan has the Prime Minister for Britain?

The hon. and learned Member may possibly have drawn that conclusion from what has happened. I do not. I suggest to the hon. and learned Member that he awaits the statement which my right hon. Friend will make when we have had a full report of what happened in Luxembourg.

Does the Prime Minister feel that the present visit of a distinguished German statesman will help Britain's application to join the Common Market and, if so, in what way?

The full support of the German Government for Britain's entry has never been in doubt. I have not yet seen any report of what has been said at Luxembourg today on behalf of the German Government, but I have no doubt at all that they will take every means open to them to secure a successful outcome to the initiative that we have taken.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see whether his right hon. Friend can make his statement before foreign affairs are debated on the Queen's Speech?

It is the intention that he should make a statement this week, but, as I have said, we must wait until we have a full report from Luxembourg. I think that it will probably be made on Thursday, but certainly before Prorogation.

In view of the fact that the strongest reservations by the Commission, and at any rate by France, have been in regard to sterling, to its valuation and to its reserve rôle, and in view of the very helpful speech made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at Rio, will the Government consider taking a fresh initiative with regard to the suggestion for a European reserve currency?

No initiative is called for. These matters can be discussed in negotiations. What my right hon. Friend said in Rio and what he said in an interview in Le Monde is what he has said in the House when we have debated these matters and what my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I stated in Paris. Since the right hon. Gentleman has, I think, incorrectly, referred to the valuation of sterling, I would just make it clear that when my right hon. Friend and I were in Paris the French Prime Minister went to great lengths to make clear his confidence in the valuation of sterling.

Why does my right hon. Friend speak about ill-informed statements? What are these ill-informed statements? When he speaks about facts which have not been disclosed, have we not been told over and over again that all the facts have been disclosed to the House? Will he now disclose the facts which hitherto have not been disclosed?

The facts have been fully disclosed to the House because, so far as Britain's economic position is concerned, we have debated it very fully and it has been dealt with many times at Question Time. When I referred to the facts, I meant the situation that at least one speech made yesterday did not seem to be based on those facts despite the efforts of my right hon. Friend and me in Paris to make the facts known to our hosts.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has for changes in the number, scope, and organisation of Government Departments; and if he will make a statement.

I keep this matter under review and will inform the House when I have any changes to propose.

Does not the Prime Minister agree that there are too many Government Departments? Is there not a need to regroup into a smaller number of major Departments, such as welfare, production and distribution, each with a senior Minister in the Cabinet?

These matters have been debated as long as Governments have existed. I will, of course, bear my hon. Friend's proposals in mind. I cannot see, however, that the best interests of British industry and trade would be served if the Board of Trade were divided into two Departments, one for production and the other for distribution.

Has the Prime Minister's attention been drawn to the answer to a Question yesterday by the Minister of Public Building and Works stating that 6 million additional feet of office accommodation have been taken by Government Departments since 1964? Is that not one of the reasons why the housing programme has fallen behind?

No, Sir. In the first place, the housing programme is not behind. I have noticed that, with the record figure of housing starts and the number of houses under construction, far fewer Questions have been put to me about housing. The office space is required for policies approved by the House, including the improvements in our social security provisions and including the investment grants scheme, for example, needed to bring work to the development areas.

asked the Prime Minister whether, since the return of Lord Alport from Rhodesia, the Government are still committed to a solution of the Rhodesian problem on the basis of Nibmar and not on the basis of the six principles.

There has been no change in our position on this matter since Lord Alport's return from Rhodesia.

Does the Prime Minister agree that there can be no confidence in securing full rights for the people of Rhodesia as a whole short of Nibmar? Does he realise that he will have the maximum support, from this side of the House at least, in any action necessary to achieve that objective?

I have nothing to add to what I have said on previous occasions about the declaration made by the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference last year. But I must repeat, as I did last time we discussed these matters in the House—because a lie has been carefully fostered on the question in Rhodesia—that we have made it clear many, many times in the House and in Rhodesia that there can be no question of early majority rule. When one looks at the state of African national leadership in Rhodesia one finds that very much emphasised. How much that is the fault of the Europeans there is a matter for debate.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the latest position on Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister if he will state what progress he has made with Mr. Ian Smith in reaching a settlement of the issue of independence for Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the most recent discussions between the Government and the illegal regime in Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's relations with Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a further statement on the progress of the investigatory talks with the illegal régime in Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about the communications which have passed between the British Government and the illegal regime in Rhodesia during the Summer Adjournment.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about ending the illegal régime in Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the latest situation in Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about Rhodesia.

As foreshadowed in my statement of 25th July, exchanges through the Governor have taken place during the Recess. I have, however, no information to give the House at the present time, though I am bound to say that the tenor of the exchanges so far has not been encouraging.

Will the Prime Minister make some comment on the operations of South African troops and armed forces in Rhodesia? Does the Prime Minister not agree that it would have been better and more honest if the Leader of the Opposition at Brighton had educated his own party delegates to the moral issues involved in this dispute?

On the first point, Her Majesty's Government have issued a statement and I will see that it is made available in the Library and to my hon. Friend. On the second point, I very much applaud the fact that in that speech, which I have read, the Leader of the Opposition fully supported the need for a return to legality and constitutional law and once again, and I think very rightly, reiterated the six principles, which were, of course, the policy of the previous Government, as well as being the policy of this Government. I think that that was entirely helpful. The only criticism I make is that he went on fostering the misunderstanding, the misrepresentation, that the "Tiger" talks foundered on a demand by us for direct rule. There was no such demand, and Mr. Smith knew it.

Questions put to a Minister ought to be about a matter in which there is Ministerial responsibility.

Would it not be wise to reach a settlement and to get rid of sanctions in weeks, not months?

Yes, Sir. It was offered in days last December to Mr. Smith. On that occasion he could have gone off the ship as Prime Minister designate—legal, constitutional, Prime Minister designate—and the unwinding of sanctions would have begun immediately. Unfortunately, he or a majority of his Cabinet rejected that very fair and just offer which was made.

Since in Ghana the Constitutional Commission is giving serious consideration to a qualified franchise as more suitable to African conditions than one man, one vote, will the Prime Minister not be dogmatic about Nibmar but concentrate on trying to reach a just solution and press forward to the new legality described by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition at Brighton?

The "Tiger" constitution involved a highly qualified franchise. It would have involved qualification for that franchise over a period of very many years before we came anywhere near one man, one vote. The best estimate made at that time was about ten to twelve years. I should not have thought that that was too long a period in the circumstances. What we cannot accept—and I do not think that the previous Government would accept it either—is deliberate action on the part of the European minority to hold back progress towards the achievement of the franchise. Our offer of a great educational pro- gramme, repeating the offer of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, was flatly rejected on the ground that it would have given too many Africans the vote.

How long will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State stay in Salisbury? Does my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister think that it is humanly possible to reach an agreement, based on the six principles, which would be satisfactory to this House and to our Commonwealth friends?

My right hon. Friend plans at present to stay in Salisbury for two days, but of course, if necessary, he is prepared to stay longer. But he would require very much more evidence than has been forthcoming that there is willingness to talk about an honourable settlement in Salisbury. Certainly, no settlement would be reached by Her Majesty's Government that was not in any sense fully honourable and acceptable to this House.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that operations by foreign troops and police in Rhodesia create an entirely new situation? What steps are being taken to deal with this?

I have already answered one Question on this subject today. South African police, not troops, were involved. We have rejected their right to intervene in British territory. When my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I met the South African Foreign Minister, he limited their claim to be there to dealing with known South African terrorists heading for South Africa. However, we regard the intervention of these police as wrong and have said so.

What action has my right hon. Friend in view to concentrate Mr. Smith's mind by further action, such as, for example, quarantining the port of Lourenco Marques?

We have looked at the question of making sanctions more effective, but we should not overlook the deep effect that they are already having on the Rhodesian economy. One of the biggest problems is the sheer evasion of the oil sanctions through Lourenco Marques, and I have no doubt that this will be one of the questions that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs will be discussing with Heads of Government during his visit.

Is the Prime Minister aware that many people in Rhodesia and elsewhere find it difficult to understand our insistence on Nibmar when, in South Arabia, the Government are offering the cloak of legality to bands of terrorists not elected by anyone?

That takes the Question rather wider than Rhodesia. I am aware that many people, both European and African, in Rhodesia find it difficult to understand what this House has decided, but this is mainly because of the tight censorship of any statement of our position, and, of course, the police control of the Rhodesian television and radio. Because of this, the Rhodesian regime is able to foster total misrepresentations, such as those about the "Tiger" talks last year and about our insistence on a very long period before majority rule can he achieved not by clock time but by achievement.

Not wishing to intervene in the controversial exchanges which are taking place [Laughter.]—I do not think that this is the moment to do so—may I simply ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs will carry with him the good wishes of almost the whole country for the success of his talks in Salisbury?

Yes, Sir. I thank the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys). I am sure that my right hon. Friend will carry those good wishes with him, and in the same non-controversial spirit I should add that I know he will carry the good wishes of all in this House in standing firm for the principles which the right hon. Member for Streatham himself laid down when he held office.

While my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is in Salisbury, will he seek an opportunity to meet those African leaders who are now in detention and who represent many more Rhodesians than does Mr. Smith?

In these matters my right hon. Friend will no doubt be guided by the Governor, although it will be recalled that when his predecessor, Lord Aylestone, was there on two occasions last autumn repeated and formal requests by him to see the African Nationalist leaders were completely rejected by the régime. [HON. MEMBERS: "For no reason."] Mr. Smith had good reason. He was prepared to allow Lord Aylestone to meet them but Mr. LardnerBurke would not let him.

Is the Prime Minister aware that independent African Commonwealth countries both north and south of the Zambesi would now be prepared to consider an end to sanctions and discussion of independence?

This matter will be discussed by my right hon. Friend with the leaders of those Commonwealth countries. But I know of no Commonwealth country which wants to sell out to an illegal action or to agree to a betrayal of the principles approved by successive Governments in this country and by this House. They would like to see, as we want to see and have offered, an ending of sanctions, but only on the basis of constitutional legality and the principles that this House has laid down.

I understood my right hon. Friend to say that there was no early prospect of majority rule. Will he confirm that this must also imply that there is no early prospect of independence for Rhodesia?

I have already stated, in relation to the Nibmar reference, as it is called, that we stand by what has been said previously in this House—that we should require a very big change in circumstances to justify our going back to other Commonwealth countries on that question.