asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will state the Government's views on the recently announced settlement between Britain and Rhodesia and what steps have been or will be taken to make known the convictions of the Irish people that no arrangement is acceptable which fails to ensure majority rule at the earliest possible date.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rhodesian Settlement.
10.
Our attitude has been made clear on several occasions, and most recently in the United Nations General Assembly on the 22nd November 1971, when we supported a resolution which reaffirmed the principles that there should be no independence before majority rule in Rhodesia and affirmed that any settlement must be worked out with the fullest participation of all nationalist leaders and must be endorsed freely by the people.
Could the Minister outline the implications of that for us? If that is our position, are we not going to recognise independence? Are we going to continue the blockade? What are our plans and policies in this matter?
I have certain apprehensions about the settlement but essentially it is a matter for the people of Rhodesia as a whole, that is, the 5 million Africans and the quarter million whites to decide whether or not the proposals are acceptable. As the Deputy knows, there is a commission appointed by the British Government to ascertain the views of all sections of the population of Rhodesia. It is crucial that this survey of opinion be carried out with the greatest care. The Security Council are considering the proposal and I would wish to await the conclusion of the council's deliberations before commenting further on this. I think I have said enough to indicate what I feel about this.
Is the Minister suggesting that this method of consultation is acceptable and that the Government accept that this will actually tell us the opinion of the people of Rhodesia?
I said I viewed the proposals with considerable apprehension but I would wait until the Security Council examines it before I comment further.
Has the Minister in mind making any suggestions to the British Government as to how it can be ensured that this consultation is an empathic one?
I think I will wait until the Security Council have finished their examination of the matter.
In view of the fact that we have accepted this principle of white rule in South Africa and made no serious attempt to impose sanctions or discontinue trade with South Africa is the Minister not indulging in hypocrisy in regard to Rhodesia?
That is a separate question.
The Deputy is quite wrong. In fact, the people who represent South Africa are much stronger in their words when they are talking to me about our attitude. We have a very definite and established attitude towards South Africa.
We still trade with them.
We are not a State trading country.
We trade with them.
We do not as a country.
The Minister should stop Irish people from exporting to South Africa.
This would not harm South Africa. It would harm Irish exporters.
There is no principle involved.
There is one which we have declared very strongly. They are aware of it and they do not like it.
As Lenin said the capitalist would sell you the rope with which to hang yourself.
The Deputy is quite wrong to blame a small country because the main trading partners will not do what would, perhaps, be effective. The Deputy is quite wrong just to blame Ireland. The action required of us would have no effect on the situation.
Does the Minister not consider it quite extraordinary that he should merely declare his apprehension about the terms which have been universally declared by many democratic countries to be a complete sell-out of majority rights in Rhodesia? In view of his dramatic preoccupation with and special concern for the rights of national independence and the rights of national majorities to have national independence how does he reconcile his mere apprehension about such terms and his tacit seeming approval of the method of consultation?
The Deputy is making a statement. He is going outside the scope of the question.
There is nothing about mere apprehension. I was asked how I felt in relation to the matter. I have also stated time and again our position. There is nothing mere about our position. The fact that the Labour Party have a load of words to throw out at any time, like Deputy Corish taking exception about something I might do next week, is ridiculous.
What is the difference between our words and the Minister's words?
Your words are weasel words. You throw them out and they do not help the situation.
(Interruptions.)
Order, this is Question Time. I am calling Question No. 11.