asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will take initiatives to make a Security Conference possible at the earliest opportunity.

I would welcome a well-prepared and businesslike meeting provided that we could be sure that matters of real substance would be dealt with. We are studying the situation with our allies.

That is the same reply as I was receiving from the Foreign Secretary's predecessors. Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that very many of us are anxious to see progress made in this matter? Will he give the House an undertaking that he will support anything that the West German Government are doing in order to reach agreement with the Warsaw Pact Powers?

That is a rather different question. But I think that the hon. Lady will have seen, as a result of the communiqué issued after I talked with Herr Scheel, that we are supporting the German policy. The matter raised in the original Question is now being studied with our allies in N.A.T.O., and there will be a N.A.T.O. reply

Will the right hon. Gentleman press N.A.T.O. to make specific proposals for mutual troop reductions? This matter has been under discussion since December, 1967, and no specific proposals have been forthcoming.

There are certain specific proposals. In 1968 the right hon. Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) and the allies proposed that there should be talks about force reduc- tions. There is now a proposal that some standing machinery might be set up by such a conference on European affairs.

Would the Foreign Secretary agree that the most recent statement by the countries of the Warsaw Pact is worthy of most careful study and could form the basis of a wise way of dealing with East-West relations?

Certainly.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress is being made with the adoption of an international convention for the prevention of hi-jacking of aircraft.

The draft Convention on Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft prepared by the Legal Committee of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (I.C.A.O.) is to be considered at a diplomatic conference in The Hague in December. The recent Extraordinary Assembly of I.C.A.O. adopted a resolution calling upon States invited to the diplomatic conference to make every reasonable effort to reach agreement and thereafter to ratify quickly.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that since we last discussed the question in the House, a number of aircraft have been hi-jacked, fortunately without very serious consequences? Could he try to persuade countries which are members of I.C.A.O. to expedite this matter?

I share my hon. Friend's concern about the need for speed but, unfortunately, under the I.C.A.O. rules of procedure, Governments must have at least six months in which to study. We will, however, be watching this and hurrying it up in any way we can.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now discontinue the Beira blockade.

I have nothing further to add to the Answer I gave to a Question by the hon. Member for Hitchin (Mrs. Shirley Williams) on 6th July.—[Vol. 803, c. 322–3.]

While recognising that sanctions will remain until the talks with Rhodesia have been completed, may I ask my right hon. Friend to bear in mind that this ridiculous blockade is unpopular with the Royal Navy, is expensive to the taxpayer and is completely ineffective as Rhodesia receives all the oil she wants by other means?

That may be but, nevertheless, as part of the negotiating policy, we have said that we will keep sanctions on until we see the position more clearly.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman say, "That may be"? Does he accept any of the remarks of his hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall)? Will he not deny that this is an ineffective blockade and that it is unpopular with our serving forces?

I can hardly deny what my hon. Friend says. For example, the blockade costs £400,000 a year.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about constitutional relations with Lesotho.

It was announced on 11th June that normal relations were being resumed with Lesotho, and business is now being conducted with the Government of Lesotho in the usual way.

While welcoming that reply, may I ask my hon. Friend to inform the House whether aid is now being supplied to Lesotho on the lines already agreed?

I understand that the local representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is in touch with the situation concerning refugees. I would refer to the Answer given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development on 9th July regarding the resumption of British aid and the problems of food in Lesotho.

Will the Minister explain what constitutional changes took place in Lesotho between the original election and 11th June which made the resumption of constitutional relations possible?

The main reason for the delay in resuming normal relations was a matter for the previous Administration and I am unable to answer in that respect. Our normal criteria for recognition are that we should be satisfied that a new Government enjoys, with a reasonable prospect of permanence, the obedience of the mass of the population and effective control over the greater part of the territory concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the future of Anguilla.

The Commission appointed jointly by the last Government and by Mr. Bradshaw to inquire into the Anguilla problem has not yet completed its work. When its report is available, we shall review the situation in consultation with the State Government and the Anguillans.

Will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that the Government hold to the undertaking that the Anguillans will be administered in a way which they want? Secondly, will he take early steps to eradicate the rather shameful expedition by the previous Administration to this peaceful island?

In reply to the first point raised by my hon. Friend, a satisfactory settlement can be achieved only by consultation and agreement, and we stand by the assurance in this sense which was given to the Anguillans by the previous Administration. As to the second point, we must see how we get on.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects the Wooding Commission on Anguilla to report; and if the report will be published.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten). Subject to the agreement of the St. Kitts Government, to whom the Commission's report will also be addressed, I would expect the report to be published in due course.

However wise and reasonable the Wooding Commission's Report is—and I am sure it will be—it is unlikely to be acceptable to both sides, because of the wide gulf between them. In view of that, can we have an indication of my right hon. Friend's views on the problem, which was so badly mishandled by the last Government?

Without saying anything about what happened before, I think that it would be unwise to comment in advance of the report. I had better wait and see the report and then see whether we can do better than the previous Government did.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will seek to visit the African countries of the Commonwealth.

I should like to be able to visit some of the African Commonwealth countries at a future date.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think it might have been wise to have paid a visit to these countries before he made his excursion into the rôle of arms salesman? Is he satisfied, or does he merely hope, that there will be many of these countries for him to visit after his announcement this afternoon?

I have already visited many of these African countries and I know most of the African leaders, and, therefore, I shall be very glad to resume contact with them at some future date. There are many invitations for a Foreign Secretary to go abroad. It is sometimes better for him to stay at his desk.

When my right hon. Friend is in touch with those countries will he point out to them that their safety and prosperity and, indeed, their continued independence depend on free, unfettered use of all the sea routes around Africa?

I shall be dealing with these matters a little later this afternoon.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will seek to visit the African countries of the Commonwealth and in particular Nigeria.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave earlier today in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Mr. Maclennan).

As regards Nigeria, may I remind my right hon. Friend that the last Administration gave positive help to the Government of Nigeria in suppressing a minority in that country? Is he aware that there is concern in this country that insufficient effective help is being given by that Government to the alleviation of the distress of that minority in the Eastern Region and that it would help if my right hon. Friend visited that country?

The help given by the Nigerian Government for relief is another matter. I hope that perhaps the right hon. Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart), who was previously Foreign Secretary, might well manage to visit Nigeria. Certainly, if I can do so soon I should like to visit that country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable anxiety about relief in the former territory of Biafra and that it might help if he visited Nigeria and afterwards made a statement in the House about the situation in what was Biafra and about the destination of British help?

I will certainly bear that in mind. But, as I said before the right hon. Gentleman came into the Chamber, there are many claims on a Foreign Secretary to visit different countries. Certainly I will bear it in mind.

Now that the civil war in Nigeria is over, would not it be useful and indicative of our friendship with Nigeria if my right hon. Friend visited the country this summer or in the autumn to establish personal contact with General Gowon?

Yes, Sir. The possibiliity in the future is that General Gowon might come here. There can be no doubt about the friendship of Her Majesty's Government for the Nigerian Government. I think that we showed the attitude of friendship all the way through that Government's difficulties in their war.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that my right hon. Friend the Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) would be a welcome visitor to Nigeria and that, after his visit, it would be better to leave Nigerian affairs to the Federal Government?

I would agree with both propositions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will seek to visit the Persian Gulf.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has held with the representatives of States in the Persian Gulf.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what consultation he has now had with Governments concerned relating to the British military presence in the Gulf.

I have no early plans for a visit to the Persian Gulf. I took the opportunity of having discussions with the Shah of Iran in Brussels on 10th July, and I am in close touch with King Faisal of Saudi Arabia and other leaders in the area through diplomatic channels. Our future policy will not be determined finally until all concerned have been consulted.

Is it the purpose of the right hon. Gentleman to promote the union of the Arab Emirates in the Gulf, and, if it is, does he think this will be assisted by maintaining a British military presence there in the light of the expressed hostility to it of leading Powers in the area, including the Shah of Iran and Kuwait?

If we are successful in forming the union of the Arab Emirates—and I hope we may be successful—it is for them to say, in consultation with Britain, what support they want.

But if Britain persists in opposing the wishes of the major States, will there not be some danger of provoking another Aden type situation? Secondly, when the world is bursting with oil, and countries like Germany and Japan can get all the oil they want without having a single soldier in the area, why should not we?

It is a matter of consultation with the countries in the area, particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the Rulers. I think I should like to answer the hon. Gentleman's question at a later date when, as I hope, we are successful in finding a solution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the difficulties in forming the federation to which he referred is uncertainty as to what, if anything, the British Government are going to do about the presence of British troops in the Gulf, and that this uncertainty leads to important decisions being dodged? May I ask him, therefore, when some Minister is going to visit the Gulf, or, alternatively, whom we have in the Gulf at the moment, at a high level, to cope with this important situation?

Yes. Quite shortly, I hope, the right hon. Gentleman will be aware of the plans I have made in this direction.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that stability induced by a British presence in this area benefits not only this country but all other countries as well?

Yes, all the countries in the area of the Gulf are interested in political stability. The question is what kind of security arrangements they want to make, and, in particular, after, as we hope, a federation is formed.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received in the past month from the rulers of Dubai, Abu Dhabi or Bahrein, respectively, regarding the retention of a British military presence in the Gulf after 1971.

I am in continual and close contact with all the Rulers in the Persian Gulf through Her Majesty's Political Resident and Political Agents. It would not be right for me to divulge the content of confidential exchanges with any of the Gulf Rulers.

What rôle does my right hon. Friend envisage British forces playing in that area in the immediate future?

We have to discuss with the Rulers of the Gulf, the Shah of Iran and King Feisal of Saudi Arabia what will be the political structure in the Gulf. We hope that it will be a Federal structure and a union of Arab Emirates. Then we shall have to discuss what security system they feel is necessary to support that union.

As the Saudi Arabian Government have recently reasserted certain claims as regards the frontiers between Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia, what steps is the right hon. Gentleman taking to achieve a peaceful solution of this dispute, and what military obligations have Her Majesty's Government if they fail?

As regards the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's question, we are taking such steps as we can through diplomatic channels to help settle these disputes. As to exact obligations in respect of that dispute, I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to table another Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what approaches have been made by the Trucial States to Her Majesty's Government in the past month regarding the provision of arms, military equipment or training.

It is not the practice to disclose details of approaches of this kind from other Governments.

Does my right hon. Friend believe that the best contribution that Her Majesty's Government could make in this area, as they have in the past, would be to build up the indigenous capacity in air defence and the Trucial Scouts which would be effective against Saudi Arabia?

The Trucial Scouts have played a very useful rôle up to now. What their rôle will be in any future political settlement remains to be seen and is a matter for discussion.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the possible resumption of arms sales to South Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government to observe the Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, respectively, 181 of 7th August, 1963, 182 of 4th November, 1963, and 191 of 18th June, 1964, in so far as they related to the supply of arms to South Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what communications he has had from Africa states in the Commonwealth on the matter of the sale of arms to South Africa;

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received from the South African Government concerning a revision of the Simonstown Defence Agreement.

I would ask the hon. Gentlemen to await the statement which, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall be making later this afternoon on the Government's attitude to the Simonstown Agreement with South Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in discussions with the Danish Government about the effects of Danish salmon fishing off Greenland on salmon fishing in the United Kingdom.

As a result of these discussions, both Governments were able to support proposals which were approved at the June meeting of the International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries. The new measures, effective throughout 1971, include restrictions of the catch or tonnage of boats to the 1969 level, an eight months close season and a prohibition on certain types of nets and gear.

Is the Under-Secretary of State aware that this is hardly sufficiently satisfactory in that, although some progress has been made, I think his answer reflects a rather more optimistic situation than that which really exists, and when many people are extremely worried that if the Danes continue with their activities off Greenland there could be a threat to the very existence of Atlantic salmon?

As a fisherman myself, I sympathise with the hon. Member. This agreement does not give Britain all that we wanted and, of course, it was a compromise. Like some other countries which supported our proposal for a ban, we would have liked more rigorous restrictions. Nevertheless, it is a useful step forward that the countries engaged in the fishery have accepted the principle of limitation.

In view of the importance of this and other fishery issues to many countries apart from Britain and Denmark, will my hon. Friend consider strengthening the policing of any fishery agreement reached?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he proposes to attend the next meeting of the Council of Ministers of Western European Union.

I hope that in the future I will be able to attend a Ministerial meeting of the Council of Western European Union. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster as the Minister responsible for European affairs will be attending the next Ministerial meeting of the Council.

Will my right hon. Friend do all he can to maintain the usefulness of this organisation? Did he take the opportunity of discussing it with the French authorities during his recent visit to Paris?

I discussed a number of matters with the French authorities, not particularly W.E.U. It would be my intention, as far as I can, to promote the discussions which take place in Western European Union, because I think they are very useful.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to initiate talks with the illegal régime in Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will now make a statement on the preparation of the Government's arrangements for negotiations with the illegal Smith régime in Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what communications he has had with the illegal Smith régime in Rhodesia since 19th June.

I have nothing to add to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister's Answers to Questions by the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) and others on 14th July.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to Early Day Motion No. 21 specifically referring to the statements made by the Prime Minister on 14th July, when he declared that the five principles were enunciated by the right hon. Gentleman himself as Prime Minister and agreed by Mr. Smith, and that there is no evidence of that agreement in the Blue Book subsequently produced? Will the right hon. Gentleman produce that evidence which the Prime Minister twice asserted on 14th July existed?

It is perfectly true that we did agree matters should be handled at that time, in 1964, on the basis of these principles. Whether they were written down—they are not written down in the Blue Book—I do not know, but Mr. Smith accepted the five principles at that time.

Would the Foreign Secretary agree that basically what we are faced with here is an issue of trust, and that with regard to the illegal Smith régime there can be no question of the British Government ever approving independence before majority rule is established?

I think we had better see what kind of agreement is possible before we come to a conclusion.

The Government have made it clear that during any talks they may have with the illegal régime they will continue sanctions. Is it equally clear that they will continue sanctions unless and until an agreement in conformity with the six principles is reached?

I think we had better wait to see if we can get any negotiation at all.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which of the six principles in relation to negotiations with the illegal régime in Rhodesia listed in Cmnd. Paper No. 3793 has been dropped by Her Majesty's Government.

The hon. Member will be aware of the Answer which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave to his similar Question on 14th July. The principle in question is No. 6 of Annex A to Cmnd. Paper No. 3793.—[Vol. 803, c. 1361–2.]

Will the Foreign Secretary restate that principle? Will he also say that he is fully committed to the other five principles and that the Government will in no circumstances permit any abrogation of any of those principles in the negotiations with the illegal and discredited régime in Rhodesia?

I have already said that any arrangements made with Rhodesia would be within the five principles. The sixth principle is the protection of the European minority in the event of majority rule. I think we had better get the five out of the way first.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his recent talks with representatives of the South African Government.

I have nothing to add to what I told the hon. Gentleman (Mr. William Hamilton) on 6th July.—[Vol. 803, c. 2.]

The right hon. Gentleman told me nothing that day. Will he now say why he felt it important that the first Foreign Minister in the world that he should talk to after the General Election was the South African Foreign Minister, and whether he discussed anything other than arms sales to South Africa?

I am quite capable of saying nothing again to the hon. Gentleman, but I will tell him that the reason I saw the South African Foreign Minister was that he happened to be in London and asked to see me.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if, in the light of the supply of Soviet arms to Egypt, Her Majesty's Government will now permit the sale of Chieftain tanks to Israel with a view to preserving the balance of power in the Middle East.

I have nothing to add to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Rose) on 6th July.—[Vol. 803, c. 1.]

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the preservation of social democracy in the Middle East is extremely important, not least for the under-privileged in the Arab States, and does not he consider this a matter for urgent decision?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is a matter of the very greatest importance. We are trying to reduce tension in the area, and we will bear what he says in mind in relation to any applications for arms.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, unfortunately, Israel's policies are almost as unpopular with the General Assembly and the Security Council as South Africa's and that, while she persists in them, selling arms to her will produce extremely difficult political, economic and moral problems for us?

I have heard similar arguments in regard to the Arab States. We have to look at both sides in this difficult matter, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman would not wish me to comment.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that if no Chieftain tanks are sold by the British Government to Israel, then no British tanks will be sold to Libya?

I have already said that we do not give any indication with regard to individual arms sales. All these matters are kept in perspective, and it is certainly not our desire to give advantage to one side or the other.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Republic of South Africa.

Our policies towards the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Union of South Africa, like our policies towards other countries, are based on the national interest.

Which of these two equally odious régimes is most avidly dedicated to the destruction of the free world?

If any régime is devoted to the destruction of the free world, it will find us against it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the view of many experts in all countries that his proposal to sell arms to South Africa will immensely strengthen the hand of the Soviet Union throughout the African continent?

When the right hon. Gentleman has had as many contacts with the Soviet Union as I have, he will know that they do exactly what they like irrespective of what anyone else does.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the success of the Soviet Government in Africa and elsewhere depends upon the attitude towards the United Kingdom and the West of the local régimes, and that that attitude is bound to be prejudiced by the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman?

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will wait and see what the proposals are.

Is not it a fact that the late Labour Government not only considered that the Simonstown Agreement was important to British interests, and said so publicly, but also supplied live practice ammunition to the South African Navy?

Order. There is to be a statement on this at the end of Questions.

In view of this, is not it odd that importance should be attached to a joint agreement for defence in the South Atlantic, but that the means of carrying it out should be denied to one partner?

Yes, I said this myself the other day. The right hon. Gentleman must recognise that if any Commonwealth country looked at the record of Britain and compared it with the record of the Soviet Union, that country would think twice before criticising us.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on his recent discussions with M. Maurice Schumann, the French Foreign Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the question of the French rejoining the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was discussed with the French Foreign Minister during his recent visit to Paris; and what was the outcome.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his official talks with members of the French Government.

My talks with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister of France on 15th July were very friendly indeed. They were an encouraging sign of the continuing process of improvement in the close relations that we enjoy with the French Government. The details of our conversation must remain confidential, but we covered, among other matters of common interest, European affairs, including relations between East and West Europe, and the situation in the Middle East.

As the details, which are confidential, seem to have been officially leaked or inspired and have appeared in the Press, will the right hon. Gentleman say what discussions there have been on nuclear weapons?

No, Sir, not beyond saying that I have said to the French Foreign Minister that if France had anything to say to us on this subject we should be glad to hear it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether the French have decided to return to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation? If they have not, how will the Prime Minister's concept of an Anglo-French joint nuclear deterrent ever be applied, or is this a policy which will be quietly dropped by the right hon. Gentleman now that the General Election has been held?

The French Government must express their view to the N.A.T.O. Alliance; it is not for me to do so. The French Government have done so. There could be nuclear arrangements complementary to the N.A.T.O. Alliance, if necessary.

In view of the great importance of his last statement that there might be nuclear arrangements between Britain and France complementary to N.A.T.O. but outside the context of the Alliance—a statement which will be profoundly disturbing to most of our allies in Europe—will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has consulted our partners in the Nuclear Planning Group of N.A.T.O. on this matter and, if not, why not?

I did not say what the right hon. Gentleman attributed to me. I said that there could be arrangements. Whether it is practical or desirable that there should be is quite another matter, and whether the French will have anything to propose on this is unsure.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question about consultation with the Nuclear Planning Group?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will take steps to promote an arms embargo against any Middle Eastern country rejecting the Security Council's unanimous peace proposals.

There is no evidence that the major suppliers would agree to impose an embargo of the kind proposed by the hon. Gentleman.

Nevertheless, there is evidence that for some months the Americans have withheld arms supplies from Israel until a more positive attitude is shown to the admirable Rogers proposal. At the same time, there is evidence that the Russians have refused deliveries of offensive weapons of the Phantom type to Egypt. Are not these hopeful signs and might not the Government, perhaps with the French Government, try to develop them?

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that there are certain hopeful signs here. We should like to see the latest American initiative, which we support, go further. We should like to de-escalate in some way. Our job is to work within the four-Power group, and this is what we are seeking to do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the heavy losses incurred by the Israeli Air Force from the surface-to-air weapons supplied by the Soviet Union, and the increasing danger these missiles cause to their air operations?

Yes, Sir, we are aware of the way in which, on both sides, these weapons have created greater problems in recent months. We should like to see a reduction in these weapons, and this is why I gave the answer I did earlier.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many British subjects are known to be in Chinese custody either in prison or under house arrest; and what proportion has not been brought to trial.

Seven British subjects are at present detained, or believed to be detained, in China: I will, with permission, circulate a list of their names in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Only one, Mr. George Watt, has been brought to trial and sentenced.

Is it not a fact that for some strange reason sentenced prisoners in China are less badly treated than those awaiting trial? If this is so and we cannot obtain the release of those who are there, can we press that they should be brought to trial?

We share the right hon. Gentleman's deep concern on this matter, and the previous Government made repeated representations to the Chinese. More recently on 9th July I raised this matter on behalf of the present Government with the Chinese chargé d'affaires in London. We consider that this is a very grave matter, and we will continue to press the Chinese.

Will the hon. Gentleman press the Chinese so that ordinary access may be available to Mr. George Watt and others in the custody of the Chinese?

We have several times raised with the Chinese the possibility of Mr. Watt's three-year sentence being in part remitted. This was raised officially on 2nd July with the Chinese chargé d'affaires. We will continue to press them.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he intends to make official visits to South Africa and Portugal.

I have no plans to do so at present.

Would the Foreign Secretary contemplate going soon to both destinations to explain to the Heads of State and Foreign Ministers in those countries that the only justification for British commitment to N.A.T.O. is our utter and principled commitment to defend democracy, freedom and justice and that we have no intention, directly or indirectly, of becoming involved in alliances which are designed to protect the very ends to which N.A.T.O. is theoretically opposed?

No, Sir. Of course we do not take part in alliances which have objectives other than those which we support.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if Her Majesty's Government will support the proposals of the West German Government designed to reduce tension between East and West.

Her Majestys' Government support the Federal Government's Eastern initiatives which they believe to be imaginative and realistic.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that his answer will be greatly encouraging to the democratic Socialist leadership in West Germany and will be greatly discouraging to the right-wing attacks which are made on that leadership?

I cannot say whether or to whom my answer will be encouraging or discouraging. The point of view of Her Majesty's Government is that it is well to open up discussions with the Soviet Union.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that if anything is likely to sabotage the West German proposals to ease tension between East and West it is any suggestion of an Anglo-French nuclear deterrent outside N.A.T.O.? Would he take this opportunity to assure the House that that type of co-operation is not in the Government's mind?

Certainly there would be nothing outside the European context. I do not know whether there could be anything at all. The hon. Gentleman need not make much of this matter, because we have heard no views yet from the French Government. If they wish to put any forward, we should be glad to listen.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the contract between the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority and the Rio Tinto Corporation for the supply of uranium from South-West Africa is contrary to United Nations resolutions in the General Assembly and the Security Council, he will direct the Authority to terminate the contract.

No, Sir.

Since the presence of South Africa in South-West Africa has been declared illegal by the United Nations, is not Government support of this proposal evidence of the fact that their support of the United Nations and their supposed abhorrence of apartheid are equally bogus?

The hon. Gentleman should address the question to his own Front Bench, since this project was authorised by the previous Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the talks due to take place this month with the Argentine Government on the subject of the Falkland Islands.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Common-weath Affairs whether he will make a statement on his policy regarding talks with Argentina concerning the Falkland Islands.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will end negotiations or talks with the Argentine Republic concerning the sovereignty and future status of the Falkland Islands; and if he will make a statement.

The present discussions in London are related solely to the question of communications between the Islands and Argentina. The question of sovereignty is not on the agenda. Her Majesty's Government's position remains that there could be no question of any transfer of sovereignty against the wishes of the islanders.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if difficulties over communications have arisen these have never been caused by the Falkland Islanders whose sole fault throughout has been their wish to remain British? May we have a categoric assurance from my right hon. Friend this afternoon that there will be no further discussion whatsoever on the subject of sovereignty?

The position of Her Majesty's Government is that there can be no question of any transfer of sovereignty against the wishes of the islanders.

But does my right hon. Friend realise that these discussions have been going on for a very long time, to the detriment of the islanders? Could he not call off the discussions and tell the Argentine Government once and for all that there is no question of a transfer of sovereignty?

We should recognise that the islanders have an interest in these discussions and at present there are three Falkland Islanders participating in the discussions. They are on practical matters and I believe can be of help between the two countries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the sensible attitude he has taken will commend itself to my hon. Friends and myself.

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to make a decision on the number of staff employed in the Foreign Office and their overseas departments, and in the expenditure incurred by the Foreign Office.

The numbers of staff employed in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and in Missions abroad, and the related expenditure must depend on the results of the review of tasks begun under the previous Administration in the light of the Duncan Report. This process will continue.

Is that not a strange reply, because the Foreign Secretary knew this before he made his promise during the General Election to cut the costs of public administration and the number of civil servants? Cannot he give some idea of how many staff he will cut down and how much money he will save in the Foreign Office? Since the electorate was expecting action on this, must they now be disappointed?

Not yet, Sir, is the answer. We have not made the review. But, if the hon. Gentleman is interested, may I say that since 1964–65 there have been reductions of over 8 per cent. in staff covering functions now carried out by the Diplomatic Service.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is Her Majesty's Government's policy regarding the recognition of South Africa's right to administer South-West Africa.

The legal status of South West Africa is still in doubt and, pending clarification of the legal position, we acknowledge that the South African Government continues in practice to exercise de facto control over South-West Africa.

Is not the Foreign Secretary's answer disgraceful in view of United Nations Resolution 2145, of October, 1966, which terminated the mandate and brought the territory under the direct control of the United Nations?

It is no service to the United Nations to ask it to stretch itself beyond its capacity, particularly when the legal position is in doubt. Again I refer to the fact that right hon. Gentlemen opposite had no compunction about sanctioning the placing of British industry in South-West Africa?

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that the legal position is in no doubt at all and that, if the previous Government made a mistake, that is no good reason why he should follow it?

I emphatically agree with the last part of the hon. Gentleman's answer.

Will we recognise that the Rhodesian Government exercise de facto control over Rhodesia?