asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the outcome of his attempts to sell to a Commonwealth country or foreign power the Ghanaian frigate originally built for President Nkrumah, which has been lying in the Clyde for many years.

As my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, told the House on 21st October, arrangements are in hand to transfer ownership of the vessel to Her Majesty's Government.—[Vol. 823; c. 178.]

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it is now three years ago that I alluded to this vessel as "a floating gin palace" and suggested that, in view of the fact that the hulk and much of the vessel was sound, leaving aside the Nkrumah embellishments, it should be used for naval purposes instead of being left to lie rotting in the Clyde? What can my right hon. Friend say to bring matters up to date?

The position was that, until we agreed to take it over from Ghana a few months ago, it was the responsibility of the Ghanaian Government. Now that we have accepted responsibility for it, it will be for Her Majesty's Government to dispose of it or to use it in the way that they think fit. In view of my hon. Friend's comment about it being a gin palace, he will realise the problems that arise in combining a fighting ship and a gin palace. This is not a requirement of many navies.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House any idea about the use to which the Government might put this vessel?

For fishery protection.

That is a question that the hon. Gentleman will have to put to my noble Friend the Minister of State for Defence. It is not for me to answer it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to invite the enlarged European Economic Community to have its European Parliament headquarters in London with buildings donated by the British Government.

None, Sir.

May I first congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on the successful outcome of his recent negotiations? While thanking him for his answer, as far as it goes, may I ask him whether he does not agree that it is right and proper that the institutions connected with the Common Market should be situated in the capitals of the Common Market countries and whether he also agrees that a disproportionate, if not monopolistic, position has been attained by the capitals of the Six in terms of the headquarters of other international organisations such as U.N.E.S.C.O., O.E.C.D., N.A.T.O., F.A.O., etc., and that it is time that Britain showed her Europeanisation by offering to provide a building for the enlarged European Parliament? Can my right hon. and learned Friend assure the House that, if he is requested by the European parliamentarians, he will make that generous and sensible gesture?

At present, the sessions of the Parliament are divided between Strasbourg and Luxembourg. These arrangements appear satisfactory to the present members of that Parliament. I am sure that we do not want to disturb existing arrangements which are working satisfactorily. When we are a member of the Community, I hope that the Community may feel that some of its institutions might be sited here. But that is all a matter for the future and a matter for general agreement.

I hope that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will not take too seriously the congratulations of the hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Sir J. Rodgers) on his recent negotiations. Will he accept that a large proportion of the fishing community feels that it has been sold out?

I hope to make a statement on that later and to satisfy the hon. Gentleman that no one has been sold out.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he proposes to sign the Treaty of Accession to the Common Market.

We hope the necessary preparations will be completed in order that the Treaty may be signed in the middle of January.

As the vote on 28th October was taken subject to the agreement on fisheries, if any, can my right hon. and learned Friend assure us that the Treaty of Accession will not be signed until the fisheries agreement has been debated and voted upon in this House? In replying, I hope that my right hon. and learned Friend will not say that this is a matter for the Leader of the House, because I am asking about the signing of the Treaty of Accession.

We have, as I have to report to the House later, reached a satisfactory settlement on the fisheries problem acceptable to ourselves, to Denmark and to the Republic of Ireland. In these circumstances we are going ahead with the preparations for signing the Treaty.

I appreciate that we shall be discussing the statement by the right hon. and learned Gentleman at the end of Questions, but taking up his hon. Friend's point, he will recall that he gave the House certain assurances on 25th October regarding the situation concerning fisheries. These assurances have not been met by the agreement which he reached on Saturday with members of the Six. That being the case, will he not agree that the House must have an opportunity to discuss and debate the fisheries agreement before the Government sign the Treaty of Accession?

I had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would wait to hear what the agreement was before deciding that it was unsatisfactory in any respect. However, if he listens to my statement, and then recalls what I told the House were our objectives after my statements on 11th November and 1st December, he will see that we have reached an agreement fully in accord with those statements.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government's attitude and policy in relation to entry into the European Economic Community arising from the latest negotiations, in particular stating what common attitudes were taken together with Norway and Denmark on fisheries and on the future of European Free Trade Association.

I would ask the hon. Member to await the statement which, with permission, I shall make later today on the weekend's discussions in Brussels.

While I will certainly await the right hon. and learned Gentleman's statement on the fishery negotiations with interest, may I point out that my Question also referred to the future of the European Free Trade Association and that we are entitled to a reply on that point?

There is no problem about that in the context of the negotiations we have had on fisheries regulations. The position as to the E.F.T.A. negotiations are as I have repeatedly stated in the House.

Mr. Robert Edwards—next Question.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that by—

Order. I have not called the hon. Member for a second supplementary.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement of his most recent discussions on the fishing grounds dispute in the European Economic Community.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the latest position in the continuing discussions with the European Economic Community regarding their common fisheries policy; what co-operation he is now pursuing with other applicants and with Norway in particular in this matter; and if he will make a statement.

I would ask the hon. Members to await the statement which I shall, with permission, make later this afternoon.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress of British negotiations to join the European Economic Community.

I would ask my hon. Friend to await the statement which, with permission, I shall make later today on the weekend's discussions in Brussels.

Trusting to your benevolence, Mr. Speaker, I shall take that course.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what requests he made for the release from detention of Mr. Joshua Nkomo and the Reverend Ndabaningi Sithole during the course of his negotiations with the illegal régime and Mr. Smith in Rhodesia.

The substance of my discussions in Salisbury must remain confidential. Mr. Nkomo's case is covered by the section in the White Paper about detainees. The Reverend Sithole however is in a different category as he is serving a prison sentence.

Is that reply not a supreme example of the right hon. Gentleman's propensity for appeasing Fascist régimes? How could any reasonable basis of assessing African opinion be reached without the release of these two gentlemen? Is it not a fact that Mr. Nkomo has been unlawfully detained for many years, and that the Reverend Sit-hole was punished by a bigoted court without any real responsibility?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will keep an open mind. The important thing is that these gentlemen should make their opinions known to the Commission of Acceptability.

Would the Foreign Secretary accept that to obtain free and proper discussions before the test of acceptability—and to show the feeling of both Governments towards a settlement—a general amnesty for all those detained, under whatever law, should be made available, to show good will?

That was not a condition made at the time of the attempted settlement on "Fearless". As far as the detainees are concerned, the hon. Gentleman will perhaps have noticed that some 54 detainees have been let out in the last month and the rest will be inquired into by a tribunal.

The Foreign Secretary said—and this is roughly the view of hon. Gentlemen opposite and on this side of the House—that the important thing is for Mr. Sithole's views to be given to the Commission. When in Salisbury, did the right hon. Gentleman receive any assurance, which he could repeat to the House, that Mr. Sithole will get this opportunity and that no barrier will be raised in his way to giving evidence?

I cannot say in what way Mr. Sithole will be able to express his opinion. He sent me a long memorandum and Mr. Mugabe, his right-hand man, came to explain Mr. Sithole's views.

I must press the right hon. Gentleman on this. A moment ago he said that Mr. Sithole would be free to give his views to the Commission. Most people who know the situation in Rhodesia will feel that it is indispensable that he should be free. Surely the right hon. Gentleman sought some assurances from Mr. Smith on this? If he has not done so, will he do so immediately?

There is no doubt that Mr. Sithole will be able to express his opinion, as he did to me, but in exactly what form I would not commit myself now. It will be for the Commission to satisfy itself that it has his opinion.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what communications he has received from leaders of African Governments, and Africans inside Rhodesia, relating to his announcement on 25th November, 1971, of a proposed settlement with the illegal régime in Rhodesia.

Two messages have so far been received from African leaders in reply to a message which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister sent them when the proposals were announced. None has been received from Africans inside Rhodesia.

In view of the reported widespread mistrust of the Pearce Commission, as at present constituted, by Africans inside Rhodesia and responsible African leaders throughout the continent, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman when he will be in a position to announce additional names? Can he say whether one of them will be African?

I have said that I will announce the names very soon.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when the commission to test acceptability of the settlement proposals will start work in Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the composition and timetable of the commission set up to ascertain whether the proposals for granting independence to Rhodesia are acceptable to all sections of the population.

As regards the composition of the Commission, I am considering the possibility of appointing an additional Deputy Chairman or Deputy Chairmen, and the House will be informed as soon as a decision is reached, which I hope will be very soon. On timing, I understand that given the complex planning involved, it is unlikely that the Commission will start its work in Rhodesia until the New Year.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that information, could I ask him to make it clear that the Commission will do its work with complete thoroughness, with no pressure of deadlines and with ample time for the proposals to be clearly explained to Africans in Rhodesia?

This is most important, and the Commission can take as long as it feels is necessary.

When the Foreign Secretary appointed Lord Pearce to be Chairman of the Commission was he aware that he was the only judge to dissent from the Privy Council's recommendation that the Smith régime be made illegal? How does he expect a Commission headed by such a man to be acceptable to educated Africans in Rhodesia?

There is no question about Lord Pearce's impartiality in this matter. He is impartial and will be acceptable.

Would the right hon. Gentleman clear up an uncertainty which many hon. Members will have about the nature of the Commission? He referred to a number of commissioners and one or two additional Vice-Chairmen. He also told the House that there was no particular importance about the requirement that the report would be signed only by the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen, thereby implying that all commissioners would sign the report. Is this the case, and will the Commission be a substantial one, consisting in all—Vice-Chairmen and commissioners together—of 15 to 20 persons?

Lord Pearce feels that about 16—which would roughly make the number the hon. Gentleman suggests—would be necessary to fulfil the task. The report will probably be signed by the five.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will publish in full the details of the discussions between himself and Mr. Joshua Nkomo.

No, Sir. Like my other discussions with African leaders in Salisbury, my discussion with Mr. Nkomo was confidential.

Is the Foreign Secretary not aware that any secrecy about discussions with the detained African leaders would be very bad indeed when discussing any test of acceptability? Would he therefore comment whether we would be right in assuming that the report in the Observer of 28th November by Colin Smith about the discussions with Mr. Nkomo was an accurate report?

As for the accuracy or otherwise of the conversations I had with Mr. Nkomo, the hon. Lady will remember that I saw over 100 Africans and groups of Africans, and it would be impossible to disclose one conversation without disclosing them all.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will arrange for representatives of the major Rhodesian African political parties led by Joshua Nkomo and the Reverend N. Sithole to attend future Commonwealth conferences as observers in order to report on developments in Rhodesia arising from the agreement between Her Majesty's Government and the Smith régime.

It is not within the British Government's power to make such arrangements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is a disappointing reply since it closes one of the main avenues to African opinion following the take-over by the Smith régime? Do not the coloured peoples of Rhodesia need protection by the British Government so that the Commonwealth and world opinion may be informed about what is happening in Rhodesia after the settlement?

This must be a matter for the Commonwealth generally to consider, if it wishes to do so. It is not a matter for Her Majesty's Government alone.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the United Nations have agreed to ask two imprisoned Africans to address them on the Rhodesian problem, he will seek to persuade Mr. Ian Smith to permit these men freedom and facilities to travel to the United Nations offices.

The White Paper makes it clear that agreement was reached on the release of a number of detainees and the consideration by a tribunal of the release of others. Whilst the Rhodesian authorities are aware of the Security Council proposal, we are not in a position to require them to allow the persons concerned to visit New York.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that my Question refers to a request by the United Nations made since the White Paper? Since the Foreign Secretary and Lord Goodman appear to have a lot of influence with Mr. Smith, could not either he or Lord Goodman fly to see Mr. Smith to try to persuade him to allow these gentlemen to go to address the United Nations? Since these gentlemen have neither committed nor been found guilty of any crime, is this not the least the right hon. Gentleman can do?

The Rhodesian authorities have been informed, and I intend to take no further action.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what official communications he has received from other members of the Commonwealth to his proposals for a settlement of the Rhodesian problem.

We have received one formal communication from a member of the Commonwealth on this subject and have had a number of informal contacts. The content of these exchanges is confidential.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he intends to invite official comment from members of the Commonwealth and, if he does, will he take the trouble to circulate the official replies in the OFFICIAL REPORT? Is he aware that from the evidence we can adduce, from newspapers and other sources, the bulk of the African members of the Commonwealth and the coloured members of the Commonwealth are emphatically against the proposals put before the House?

My right hon. Friend took the trouble to write a letter to all the heads of the Governments in the Commonwealth, describing the proposals. We had only two official reactions to this. It is up to any Commonwealth leader to reply to my right hon. Friend's letter at any time.

If my right hon. Friend accedes to the request of the hon. Gentleman to publish the reactions of the African political leaders, will he at the same time make it clear whether such leaders observe the five principles in their own countries?

I think that we can safely leave this matter to the leaders of the Commonwealth Governments.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that all the evidence supplied to the Pearce Commission will be published in full in the report?

That must be for the Commission to decide.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make it his policy to seek to arrange for the United Nations Organisation to take over Southern Rhodesia as a trust territory under Articles 75 and 81 of the United Nations Charter, in the event of the test of acceptability resulting in the rejection of the proposed settlement.

The Pearce Commission have to ascertain whether the present proposals are acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole. I do not want to prejudice their task by anticipating a particular result of their work.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that his answer does not pass my test of acceptability? Does he not see that the test of acceptability in Rhodesia will be a farce if the participants are not informed of the Government's alternative policy to a settlement with Smith?

The hon. and learned Gentleman asked me before I went to Rhodesia to make a forecast of what I would do if my mission failed. I decline to make a forecast now.

On the subject of the test of acceptability, does my right hon. Friend expect to be in a position to tell the House what the full membership of the Pearce Commission will be before we rise for Christmas, and will he say whether reports emanating from Salisbury, and which appeared in the Sunday Telegraph yesterday, saying that it is in his mind now to appoint 14 commissioners, are correct? Or is this a confusion between commissioners and assessors?

I think there may be some confusion, because the whole lot are really known as commissioners. There will be five and I hope very soon to be able to announce the two additional names. On what is known as the Commission on the Test of Acceptability I think there will be 16 further members whom Lord Pearce would like to have.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman in this connection whether he will arrange for hon. Members to be given copies of the English text of the document purporting to explain the meaning of the Commission in simple terms and which I understand the Government are preparing also in African languages for the Commission's use?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what protests he has made concerning the arrest of 71 British subjects by the South African Government during the last year; and if he will list the criminal charges on which 55 of these British subjects have been detained.

There are normally no grounds for protesting in regard to the arrest in a foreign country of a British subject who is charged with having committed an offence under the law of that country. We have as necessary reminded the South African Government that when a United Kingdom citizen is arrested we expect him to be charged and brought to trial or speedily released. I will with permission circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the other details which the hon. Member has requested.

As he will see, they cover a very wide range of which theft and fraud amount to well over half of those involved.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether those seven arrested on political charges have been brought to trial and charged and, if not, what protests he has made in this connection?

Of the seven, three were charged and convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. After one month they were released and deported. One of the other four is the Dean of Johannesburg, and there is the question of an appeal at present. The other three who have not yet been charged are concerned with matters on which we have made representations, but these are more recent arrests.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement about the arrangements made by Her Majesty's Government in the form of a Treaty with the Sultan of Muscat and Oman, following British withdrawal from the Gulf.

No fresh treaty was called for.

A Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation was concluded between the United Kingdom and the Sultanate on 20th December, 1951, and remains in force. Its validity has not been affected by the recent termination of our special treaty relations with Bahrain, Qatar and the Trucial States, or by the plans for the withdrawal of British forces from the Gulf.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Sultan of Muscat and Oman, at a recent Press conference, in the presence of French journalists, stated that he had signed a secret treaty with Her Majesty's Government to last for 30 years, regulating the maintenance of British military bases in that country? Is he aware that this has already been reported in the French Press? Is he further aware that there has been a civil war in that country for the last 16 years and that many hundreds of political prisoners are still detained without trial? Is it not time that we withdrew our support for this unrepresentative hereditary ruler and supported the people of Muscat and Oman, who want a democratic régime?

This is an independent Government with whom Britain is in a treaty relationship, and I have explained what that relationship is. I know nothing of the Press conference to which the hon. Gentleman refers, but if he would like to send me details I would be happy to look into it.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek leave to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Tanzanian Government in respect of that provision of the Exchange Control Ordinances which can compel British subjects working in Tanzania to sell assets in Great Britain in exchange for Tanzanian currency.

None, Sir. The existing law on this subject remains the same as it was before independence.

Does that not mean that if a British subject is in Tanzania for 300 days and thereafter he were to inherit, say, £1,000 in this country he could be compelled to convert that money to Tanzanian shillings, which would be uncashable in Great Britain and possibly irremovable from Tanzania? Is that not an intolerable position, about which representations ought to be made?

The difficulty is that the present arrangements are those which were enforced before Tanzania became independent and therefore I do not see how we can make representations for changes in a law which we tolerated in those circumstances. The position about the 300-day rule is that this is a new provision suggested in a proposed law which has not yet been promulgated. I am told, however, that the Bank of Tanzania will still retain its existing discretion to define residential status in certain special circumstances and that might apply in the case the hon. Gentleman raised, although without further details I could not say definitely.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Common. wealth Affairs what representations he made to the Israeli Foreign Minister during his recent talks with him, for Israel to reconsider its rejection of Ambassador Jarring's request made earlier this year, for a specific commitment of Israeli withdrawal from occupation of the territory of neighbouring countries in the light of four power talks on the Middle East.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement concerning his recent talks with the Israeli Foreign Minister, Mr. Abba Eban.

My talks with Mr. Eban naturally centred on the situation in the Middle East, but we also discussed a number of other subjects of mutual interest. The details must remain confidential.

Will the right hon. Gentleman continue to take every possible opportunity to impress upon the Government of Israel that its continuing occupation and colonisation of the territory of neighbouring countries is the major obstacle to a peaceful settlement in the Middle East?

The most practical thing to do is to try to get discussions going between Egypt and Israel, in particular under Resolution 242. As long as the momentum of talks can be maintained under that Resolution, and possibly speeded up, that is the best hope of peace.

Is it not clear that Israel, perhaps like India, is not prepared to accept paper guarantees and has always welcomed the prospect of direct talks with her Arab neighours?

That is true and it is the Israeli case that negotiations ought to start, but we all know the limitations to the possibilities of those negotiations. I was quite convinced after having been to Cairo and seeing Mr. Eban that the momentum of these discussions must, in one way or another, be stepped up and under a third party. The best third party anyone has been able to think of so far is Dr. Jarring.

Is it not clear that Israel is obviously deeply suspicious as a result of what happened on the previous occasion when the United Nations troops were withdrawn very quickly? Is it not also clear that Israel really does want peace and has made it absolutely clear that she must have peace with guaranteed frontiers to ensure her existence as a State?

There have been a number of offers of international guarantees and I think that we could in any new international guarantees avoid the dangers of the past, for example by making a decision on withdrawal unanimous.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the Egyptians have now given all the undertakings requested of them by Ambassador Jarring and by the British and American Governments? Is it not plain that if war in the Middle East is to be avoided pressure must be brought to bear on Israel sooner or later to make her contribution?

I think it is true that Egypt and the Arab countries want to live at peace with Israel. I was satisfied of that. Nevertheless, the deadlock remains, and the practical thing is to try to find a way out of the deadlock by starting talks with a much greater momentum than they have had up to now.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has yet decided on the places at which he proposes to establish three new development divisions overseas and the total number of staff proposed; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot yet say where the new divisions will be. I hope to be in a position to do so very soon and to give the other information for which the hon. Member asks.

The whole House will welcome the extension of the Department's work in this way. When the extra divisions are full established, will the right hon. Gentleman consider how they may serve the high commissions and embassies in the area in order to encourage a great deal of activity from the other side of the right hon. Gentleman's Department?

I feel that the future development divisions will have to operate largely as the existing development divisions have done, namely, in close conjunction with embassies and high commissions in their areas, in order to maximise the effectiveness of their work.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the recent visit to India of the Minister for Overseas Aid.

I returned to England on 1st December after spending two weeks in or near Bombay, Delhi and Calcutta, at the invitation of the Government of India.

I was able to see examples of the developments in agriculture, and I looked at both light and heavy industry, at some of the educational institutions which we are assisting, and at urban improvement work in Calcutta. I had useful talks with a number of Ministers about the continuing rôle of British aid, and I signed two loan agreements. I also discussed, both with Ministers and with business men, the opportunities for foreign private investment.

Finally, in West Bengal, I saw some of the refugee camps, and the work of voluntary organisations from Britain within them. This has given me a clearer idea of some of the problems that will have to be solved when the fighting is over.

In planning his forward programmes, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the tremendous amount which India has given in order to deal with the refugee problem, which the right hon. Gentleman has seen? Although India still ranks high in the total amount of aid given, because of its large population and large area which has to be extended, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that the amount is even larger to deal with the fresh problems which he has seen?

I shall have very much in mind in the next few months all the considerations which the hon. Gentleman mentioned. I appreciate the continuing need not only for development in India but for the relief of the refugees, whether they remain in West Bengal or in East Pakistan, in the next few months.

In considering this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that a new factor seems to have entered into the situation, and that is the extraordinary and regrettable decision of the United States Government to cease providing economic aid to India? In my view, this is an added reason for calling a meeting of the India Aid Consortium.

As I understand it, the United States Government have suspended that portion of their promised aid to India which has not been committed. My view is that we should continue to give India the aid which we have pledged. Therefore, I hope that the right hon. Lady and I are in full agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in which countries outside the Commonwealth the Commonwealth Development Corporation now has projects; what have been the principal financial problems encountered in taking on projects in non-Commonwealth countries; and whether he will make a statement.

The Commonwealth Development Corporation has projects in Cameroon and in Indonesia and others are being considered in Ethiopia and Thailand. The two main financial difficulties encountered by the Corporation in non-Commonwealth countries concern its tax position and the high cost of commencing operations in new countries.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask whether he would also agree that one of the difficulties about the Corporation's effectiveness outside the Commonwealth is the very high interest rates at which money is made available by the Treasury in this country? Is there any prospect of seeing favourable rates of interest charged on money to the Corporation for projects outside the Commonwealth?

This is a matter which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, we have been considering. I shall certainly take note of what he said because I, too, am very anxious, as, I believe, is the hon. Member, that the C.D.C. should widen its operations in the developing world generally.

Before considering an extension of the corporation's activities in Indonesia, would my hon. Friend get a satisfactory settlement with the Government of Indonesia of outstanding claims to compensation for British assets seized?

This is another question and outside the proper field of my responsibility.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the latest position in the Persian Gulf.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a further statement about the situation in the Gulf.

I have nothing to add to the statement made to the House by my right hon. Friend on 6th December.—[Vol. 827, c. 944–6.]

Would my right hon. Friend say whether it is intended to establish a base to assist the Union in planning its defence forces and, if so, whether this base can be used by British troops in rotation?

Yes. There is a proposal for British forces to train in the area at regular intervals. That has been arranged in accordance with the plan outlined by my right hon. Friend in his statement in March.

In view of the irrational confiscation by Libya of the oil company following recent events in the Gulf, would the Government now desist from demeaning themselves—complete with Lawrence of Arabia headgear—by courting the irrational tyrannies and, instead, adopt a sensible policy with the one stable democracy in the area?

I am not clear what the hon. Gentleman is asking us to do. We inherited from his party a difficult problem in the Gulf area which my right hon. Friend, with great patience, has brought to what I believe is a satisfactory and honourable conclusion under which all the States in the Gulf, both Arab and non-Arab, can, I think, look forward to a future of stability, as a result of what Britain has done. I would have thought it would commend itself to the hon. Member.

Would my right hon. Friend continue to pursue British interests in the area, and in this connection would he make representations to the Government of Kuwait, who have always had a very moderate policy, to try to persuade them that it must be in the interests of Kuwait as well as of other countries which want to see stability in the Gulf that good relations between Iran and Kuwait should be preserved, and, at the same time, indicate how British foreign policy recently has been imaginative in the Middle East and, therefore, how ridiculous it is for countries to discriminate against us and not the United States?

Yes, I agree very much with what my hon. Friend has been saying, and we would want to see in the States in the Gulf the best possible relationships between one another and with us. I believe that there is a community of interests between the Arab States there and Iran, which we have been trying to bring about and foster. It has been the whole purpose of our policy to ensure stability which, I believe, will be achieved by the arrangements which we have helped to establish.

Going back to the original Question, is it the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Gulf, or just the Gulf?

One Question referred to the Gulf and the other to the Persian Gulf. I am quite happy to rest on the Gulf.

Was the settlement quite honourable, as the right hon. Gentleman has suggested? He is aware—is he not?—that there were some people shot and some killed during the time when we were—shall we say?—accountable for law and order. Is compensation being paid to the families of those who were shot?

The hon. Member refers to an unfortunate incident on the Greater Tunb Island, which we regret very much, but, although, as he says, we were responsible, for it is true that Britain's responsibility did not end technically until 24 hours later, we have made it quite clear that we did not think that that was possible or practicable, when we were at the end of the period of our protection, as we explained to the Ruler of Ras al Khaimah. While we regret it, we cannot accept responsibility for it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the latest initiatives taken by Her Majesty's Government to secure an East-West security conference and an agreement for mutual balanced force reductions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further initiatives Her Majesty's Government have made to enable an East-West security conference to be held.

I and my colleagues of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation discussed the proposed Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe very fully at the recent meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Brussels as well as the question of mutual and balanced force reductions. The Alliance's policy, with which Her Majesty's Government concur, is set out in the Communiqué issued after that meeting, which, with permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

As this weekend East and West initialled a transit agreement, what on earth are we waiting for now? Is it not clear that in international circles the British Government are regarded as being the ones to apply the brake to greater progress towards a security conference?

We are not waiting for anything. We did not want to wait for anything. When we left Lisbon after the last meeting of the North Atlantic Council we anticipated that multilateral arrangements for a security conference would begin. The hon. Member will recall that the Russians required that the protocol should be signed simultaneously with ratification of the treaties between the Federal German Republic, Poland and the Soviet Union. Now the Federal German Republic has to pass some acts through its Parliament connected with these treaties. So I am afraid that preparation of the security conference has been delayed by that for the last few months.

Could the Foreign Secretary explain why it is not possible for preparations for the security conference to begin immediately? He will recognise that the passing of the treaties through the Bonn Parliament is largely at the mercy of decisions of the opposition parties in Bonn, whereas the earlier we have the security conference in Europe, which, as he himself admitted, is in the interests of all peoples in Europe, East and West, and the sooner we can make progress towards such a conference, the better.

The right hon. Gentleman will have seen that the members of the North Atlantic Council are anxious to get on with preparations. Therefore, we are contacting the Finnish Government who have offered to give facilities for such a conference. The judgment of the Council of Ministers was that the multilateral preparations must begin as soon as possible after the ratification of the two German Treaties with Poland and the Soviet Union, and after the signature of the Berlin protocol.