The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Commonwealth

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Harare Declaration (I) – 21 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on the Harare Declaration, made in an interview in Harare on Monday 21st October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if different countries have different definitions of democracy and if that would be a problem].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I do not think there is a real problem, we have elaborated in the Harare Declaration what we mean by good government, you can call it good government, you can call it sound administration, you can call it just and honest government. We have set out a string of criteria in the Harare Declaration, everyone has accepted that, we have collectively accepted the Harare Declaration. But that is a remarkable move forward, I do not believe it is a declaration that could have been agreed at previous Commonwealth conferences.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked how it would work without sanctions or enforcement].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are not a punitive organisation, the Commonwealth, we operate by example and we operate by peer pressure. If over time people sign up to principles that they do not adopt then the Commonwealth will have to decide how it responds to those particular members. But at the moment there is no reason to suppose that will happen, no-one has been dragged kicking and screaming into signing this declaration, they have signed it willingly and there has been a very good natured and good humoured discussions about it all. So we have no reason to suppose at the moment that people will not honour those commitments to which they have agreed this week.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if in the future membership of the Commonwealth would be conditional on these requirements].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If I may say so, you are raising the question on a false premise. People have willingly signed up to the matter this week, if they do not honour it then we can decide what to do about it. For the moment there is no reason to doubt that people mean to achieve what they have set out in the Harare Declaration.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if previous declarations twenty years ago had been similar].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Singapore declaration did not cover and was not as specific as the points that are in the Harare Declaration. The Harare Declaration sets out a clear elaboration of what we actually mean by good government and it makes specific reference to human rights, specific reference to democracy, and I think you will find the Commonwealth will go in the direction that the declaration has set out.

  • Text of the Harare Declaration – 20 October 1991

    Below is the text of the Harare Declaration, signed in Harare, Zimbabwe, on the 20th October 1991.

    Issued by Heads of Government in Harare, Zimbabwe on 20 October 1991

    1. The Heads of Government of the countries of the Commonwealth, meeting in Harare, reaffirm their confidence in the Commonwealth as a voluntary association of sovereign independent states, each responsible for its own policies, consulting and co-operating in the interests of their peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace.
    2. Members of the Commonwealth include people of many different races and origins, encompass every state of economic development, and comprise a rich variety of cultures, traditions and institutions.
    3. The special strength of the Commonwealth lies in the combination of the diversity of its members with their shared inheritance in language, culture and the rule of law. The Commonwealth way is to seek consensus through consultation and the sharing of experience. It is uniquely placed to serve as a model and as a catalyst for new forms of friendship and co-operation to all in the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.
    4. Its members also share a commitment to certain fundamental principles. These were set out in a Declaration of Commonwealth Principles agreed by our predecessors at their Meeting in Singapore in 1971. Those principles have stood the test of time, and we reaffirm our full and continuing commitment to them today. In particular, no less today than 20 years ago:

    – we believe that international peace and order, global economic development and the rule of international law are essential to the security and prosperity of mankind;

    – we believe in the liberty of the individual under the law, in equal rights for all citizens regardless of gender, race, colour, creed or political belief, and in the individual’s inalienable right to participate by means of free and democratic political processes in framing the society in which he or she lives;

    – we recognise racial prejudice and intolerance as a dangerous sickness and a threat to healthy development, and racial discrimination as an unmitigated evil;

    – we oppose all forms of racial oppression, and we are committed to the principles of human dignity and equality;

    – we recognise the importance and urgency of economic and social development to satisfy the basic needs and aspirations of the vast majority of the peoples of the world, and seek the progressive removal of the wide disparities in living standards amongst our members.

    1. In Harare, our purpose has been to apply those principles in the contemporary situation as the Commonwealth prepares to face the challenges of the 1990s and beyond.
    2. Internationally, the world is no longer locked in the iron grip of the Cold War. Totalitarianism is giving way to democracy and justice in many parts of the world. Decolonisation is largely complete. Significant changes are at last under way in South Africa. These changes, so desirable and heartening in themselves, present the world and the Commonwealth with new tasks and challenges.
    3. In the last twenty years, several Commonwealth countries have made significant progress in economic and social development. There is increasing recognition that commitment to market principles and openness to international trade and investment can promote economic progress and improve living standards. Many Commonwealth countries are poor and face acute problems, including excessive population growth, crushing poverty, debt burdens and environmental degradation. More than half our member states are particularly vulnerable because of their very small societies.
    4. Only sound and sustainable development can offer these millions the prospect of betterment. Achieving this will require a flow of public and private resources from the developed to the developing world, and domestic and international regimes conducive to the realisation of these goals. Development facilitates the task of tackling a range of problems which affect the whole global community such as environmental degradation, the problems of migration and refugees, the fight against communicable diseases, and drug production and trafficking.
    5. Having reaffirmed the principles to which the Commonwealth is committed, and reviewed the problems and challenges which the world, and the Commonwealth as part of it, face, we pledge the Commonwealth and our countries to work with renewed vigour, concentrating especially in the following areas:

    – the protection and promotion of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth:

    – democracy, democratic processes and institutions which reflect national circumstances, the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, just and honest government;

    – fundamental human rights, including equal rights and opportunities for all citizens regardless of race, colour, creed or political belief;

    – equality for women, so that they may exercise their full and equal rights;

    – provision of universal access to education for the population of our countries;

    – continuing action to bring about the end of apartheid and the establishment of a free, democratic, non-racial and prosperous South Africa;

    – the promotion of sustainable development and the alleviation of poverty in the countries of the Commonwealth through:

    – a stable international economic framework within which growth can be achieved;

    – sound economic management recognising the central role of the market economy;

    – effective population policies and programmes;

    – sound management of technological change;

    – the freest possible flow of multilateral trade on terms fair and equitable to all, taking account of the special requirements of developing countries;

    – an adequate flow of resources from the developed to developing countries, and action to alleviate the debt burdens of developing countries most in need;

    – the development of human resources, in particular through education, training, health, culture, sport and programmes for strengthening family and community support, paying special attention to the needs of women, youth and children;

    – effective and increasing programmes of bilateral and multilateral co-operation aimed at raising living standards;

    – extending the benefits of development within a framework of respect for human rights;

    – the protection of the environment through respect for the principles of sustainable development which we enunciated at Langkawi;

    – action to combat drug trafficking and abuse and communicable diseases;

    – help for small Commonwealth states in tackling their particular economic and security problems;

    – support of the United Nations and other international institutions in the world’s search for peace, disarmament and effective arms control; and in the promotion of international consensus on major global political, economic and social issues.

    1. To give weight and effectiveness to our commitments we intend to focus and improve Commonwealth co-operation in these areas. This would include strengthening the capacity of the Commonwealth to respond to requests from members for assistance in entrenching the practices of democracy, accountable administration and the rule of law.
    2. We call on all the intergovernmental institutions of the Commonwealth to seize the opportunities presented by these challenges. We pledge ourselves to assist them to develop programmes which harness our shared historical, professional, cultural and linguistic heritage and which complement the work of other international and regional organisations.
    3. We invite the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and non-governmental Commonwealth organisations to play their full part in promoting these objectives, in a spirit of co-operation and mutual support.
    4. In reaffirming the principles of the Commonwealth and in committing ourselves to pursue them in policy and action in response to the challenges of the 1990s, in areas where we believe that the Commonwealth has a distinctive contribution to offer, we the Heads of Government express our determination to renew and enhance the value and importance of the Commonwealth as an institution which can and should strengthen and enrich the lives not only of its own members and their peoples but also of the wider community of peoples of which they are a part.

     

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Commonwealth – 20 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on the Commonwealth, made in an interview at Victoria Falls on Sunday 20th October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he was satisfied with his first Commonwealth Declaration as Prime Minister].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I am very pleased with the declaration, it is very forward looking, it picks up all the themes we were most concerned about – good government, human rights – but above all it is a forward looking document, it is the Commonwealth of the 1990s, not harking back to the problems of earlier years.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he felt all countries could support the Declaration, even those with less developed democracies].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I am confident they will carry it out, there was a very remarkable atmosphere at this Commonwealth conference. No it was not especially difficult to agree the communique, frankly, there were many points that needed discussions upon which different views were expressed, but by the time those had been expressed a common view right across the Commonwealth emerged and you will see it in the communique.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why there were no sanctions].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Commonwealth is not really that sort of organisation. The way it does operate is through peer pressure and by example and I think it is perfectly clear that the peer pressure of the Commonwealth and the example both within the Commonwealth and beyond the Commonwealth will have a very salutary effect. So I think we will see some practical results.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on South Africa – 18 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on South Africa, made in an interview held in Harare on Friday 18th October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about sanctions in South Africa].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have never agreed that the imposition of sanctions and the way they have been used over recent years was the right way to deal with the problem in South Africa and for a very practical reason too. If you look forward at what South Africa most needs now, it is investment into South Africa to increase its growth. They have the horrendous problem of nearly three percent population growth a year and no economic growth at all. What that effectively means is that year after year after year the poorest people in South Africa get relatively poorer.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why he was giving up pressure on South Africa near the end of the reform process].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am convinced myself that the process of change in South Africa is irreversible. All the main pillars of apartheid have now been legislatively abolished. We are moving towards a constitutional conference at which a new constitution for South Africa can be determined. That is going to happen; whether it is going to happen this year or whether it will be determined next year, I can’t be clear but if investment in South Africa only starts after that, it is going to be the late 1990s before it is effective, before it creates growth, before it creates jobs and there are 7 million people unemployed in South Africa – they need that investment and they need it speedily.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked his reaction to Mr Mandela’s comments to hold on for a while].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There are differences in view about how we should approach it. Where there is an agreement of view, is that sanctions must go. The dispute that still exists is the speed at which it should go. I just set out the practical reasons why I think we should move more speedily than the Commonwealth itself wishes but there are many old scars and divisions here and I think that difference of emphasis on speed will remain.

  • Mr Major’s Speech in Harare – 17 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Harare on Wednesday 17th October 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, Your Majesty, fellow Heads of Government, Ministers, Secretary General, Ladies and Gentlemen. It is a particular pleasure to be able to thank President Mugabe for the warm and friendly welcome that we have all received here in Zimbabwe. And I think in that warm and friendly atmosphere I both hope and believe that today we can see the opening of a new chapter for the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is unique, nothing like it has ever existed and nothing could replace it. It belongs to all of us and in particular perhaps it belongs to the young people who are with us today whose future we will be discussing this week.

    When we last met in Kuala Lumpur, East Berlin had just marked the first 10,000 days of the Berlin Wall. Little did the authorities realise, little did anyone realise that that wall would be breached before it was 100 days older. And I must say I had just completed the first 80 days of being Foreign Secretary, little did I realise I would no longer be Foreign Secretary 10 days later. But the world has changed dramatically since we last met. Communism has been discredited and it is being discarded. The events of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union have proved that government by centrally controlled ideology is unfair, inefficient and ultimately unacceptable.

    People will not be governed indefinitely by a remote authority, people demand the right to express their nationhood and they also increasingly insist on their rights as individuals within each nation.

    In the Commonwealth we have long realised that international order is based on cooperation and that where a relationship rests on coercion then there is no basis for cooperation. Our common language is a cornerstone of our organisation but common values are even more important than a common language. Most of the world now agrees that democracy and the rule of law are indispensable to a civilised society. And since its establishment 45 years ago, the principles of the Commonwealth have been based on those values. The common law enshrined in the constitution of nearly all our members is there to uphold the impartial rule of law and our largest country is also the largest democracy in the world – India.

    Member states of the Commonwealth have not always applied the values which our organisation represents but we have always held on to those values, they represent a yardstick of behaviour for each one of us. The Commonwealth is well placed to catch the tidal wave of human rights and democracy which is sweeping across much of the world. We can ride that wave or be carried along by it, but we cannot ignore it. This meeting must set the framework for the Commonwealth of the 1990s, we must build on our existing strengths, make the most of new possibilities. But the bedrock of what we must do must be the general application of democracy and human rights. It is on that basis that we can build good government and economic prosperity.

    There is no wish to impose particular models. Different parts of the world have different traditions, different means of establishing a consensus, different institutions and different problems. Of course each society will strike its own balance between individual rights and the responsibilities of the state. But recent history shows us that stifling individual rights leads to discontent and economic failure and ultimately collapse.

    We must all meet basic standards in human and democratic rights, universal standards, not Western standards. When the Commonwealth discusses those standards the debate is not one part of the membership lecturing another, it is all part of the membership consulting, I hope also agreeing on what we should all strive to achieve. Those achievements should include tolerance of free debate and genuine democracy. That means the rights of our citizens to choose freely who governs them.

    These are the yardsticks by which increasingly governments will be judged and thanks to its traditions the Commonwealth can give a lead.
    Today President Sam Nujoma joins us for his first Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting since Namibia’s independence. For years Namibia was one of the world’s unsolved problems and seemingly some thought unsolvable. It took pressure, internal pressure and external pressure, hard negotiation and ultimately realism to bring Namibia to freedom and independence. And in welcoming Namibia to the Commonwealth we are doing more than simply inviting her to join a club. Namibia is joining an organisation which stands for certain values and which can use its collective strength to help its individual members and to wield influence in world affairs.

    In the past there have been differing views about how we should use that influence to bring about fundamental change in South Africa. But all of us have used our influence and all of us can welcome the radical changes that have taken place.

    In the last 20 months the South African government have repealed the Land Acts, the Population Registration Act and the Group Areas Act. The burden that now rests on all the leaders of all sectors of community in South Africa is a heavy one. There will be many obstacles and set-backs in the way of South Africa becoming a genuinely democratic nation. The core issue will be to draft a constitution for majority rule in a multiparty state. We can all play a part in helping South Africa to tackle the obstacles to agreement but only the South African parties themselves can make a new democratic constitution for their country and we all wish them well in that endeavour.

    But South Africa will need more than just our good wishes, they will need the help of the international community if they are to return to economic growth which is essential for the stability of South Africa and the prosperity of all the people who live in South Africa.

    At the heart of the constitutional negotiations will be the values that we and the Commonwealth hold to be fundamental. I hope and I believe those values will be carried through into a new constitution and I look forward to the day when a non-racial South Africa might want to rejoin us. And we must in any case stand ready to re-admit South Africa to the international community of nations.

    As old problems are solved so a new agenda unfolds. On the environment, drugs, anti-terrorism, health, Commonwealth members have long had a tradition of cooperation. In these fields and others Britain stands ready to help where it can. Eighty percent of British development aid goes to members of the Commonwealth.

    Next year the United Nations will hold a conference on environment and development, a unique event. So far progress in preparing that conference has been slow, there is little sign yet of real consensus as to what the conference’s outcome should be. But here I believe the Commonwealth can give a lead. We, the Heads of Government can give a practical political push to the conference process. We can help to promote the signature at Rio of effective framework conventions on climate change and biodiversity.

    These are not just buzzwords, these issues are vital. The world is still losing a tropical forest the size of a football pitch each and every second. Many of the countries of Africa are having to find a balance between the competing claims of human development and natural conservation. All of us, developed and developing countries alike, have come to realise that the only solution is to work as one to safeguard the future of the one world that we all share.

    In these hectic times the chance to talk comprehensively over a few days is rare. But it is essential if we are to understand each other’s problems and each other’s hopes.

    I know this week, under your chairmanship, President Mugabe, we will all bring the spirit of mutual encouragement to our talks here. The Commonwealth is in tune with the spirit of the times, its structures, its history and its ethos all equip it to flourish in the 1990s.

    The Commonwealth has new relevance, its way of doing things will I believe be seen as among the best ways to conduct international relations. The Commonwealth can set an example, dialogue, negotiation, the peaceful settlement of disputes – that is the way forward and the Commonwealth can set the trend.

    Mr President, under your chairmanship this week we can begin that work.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Harare – 17 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Harare, held on 17th October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    Can we ask you why you felt it was necessary to threaten that Britain would go it alone in forgiving this debt?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not threatening anything at all, what I am saying is that there are a very large number of very poor countries out there and the Trinidad Terms initiative can help them to a greater extent than they have ever been helped before. And I want to push that snowball down the hill a little, that is what we are doing, it will make a material difference. What it will mean for really the poorest countries in the world is that they have some incentive to put their economy to rights and not see all the virtues of that disappear in debt relief.

    QUESTION:

    But is the initiative meeting resistance from other members of the Paris Club?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I think the Paris Club will support it, it has been under discussion for some time and I think there will be general support for it. Immediately I announced it the Prime Minister of Canada announced that he would follow suit, the Australians have said they will look at it very carefully and I suspect others will too. I think it is very important that we actually get this initiative off the ground and the debt written off.

    QUESTION:

    Are you going to link this to human rights?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The help we have proposed with the right offer of Trinidad Terms is related to a good IMF programme and the IMF themselves look at matters of that sort. So there is a natural link.

    QUESTION:

    How do you feel as a former bank manager wiping out 500 million pounds of British debt with one stroke of a pen?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I looked at it also from the point of view of the countries who are receiving the assistance. I think it is often very hard to get a proper perspective of what life is actually like in some of these countries. I do emphasise again that these are the very poorest countries in the world, the average income for people in these countries is about 400 pounds a year or less. The people with least income in those countries are therefore by definition very poor indeed and the best way to help them is to help their countries actually produce a better performance for the future. Removing the debt burden by writing it off seems to us to be the best way to help.

    QUESTION:

    Will this relieve starvation in the short or long term?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I do not think it will deal with the immediate food problems, no. I think what it does do is help countries put themselves in a better position to invest and to build up a secure economy of their own, it certainly does that but it will not remove the need for emergency help from time to time.

    QUESTION:

    Does this relieve you of increasing the foreign aid through the normal channels?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are in the middle of the public expenditure round and this is a separate matter from that, this is a write-off of debt. I think it is fail to remind people that it was the British government that first introduced Toronto Terms when Nigel Lawson was Chancellor, that was an innovation in its day and way ahead of what anyone else was even contemplating. We have now carried that a really very significant step forward with Trinidad Terms.

    QUESTION:

    What was the response from the other Commonwealth countries here apart from Canada?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They welcomed it, the Australians have welcomed it. There has not been much time to talk to the others, there was a very warm response from the conference hall itself.

    QUESTION:

    What about from Mr Mugabe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr Mugabe was particularly warm about it but you must ask him.

    QUESTION:

    Did you do this mainly for economic reasons or compassionate reasons?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think both. I do not think you can compartmentalise them, it is not a sudden idea that suddenly emerged from the top of our head.
    I floated the idea of Trinidad Terms and announced what our policy was at the Commonwealth Finance Ministers Meeting at Trinidad – hence the name – two years ago. Since then we have refined it. What it amounts to is a straightforward write-off of two-thirds of the debt of those countries. Now that is infinitely greater than anything that has been seen before. What has often happened in the past is that the developed countries have offered help but they have offered help by saying keep the debt, we will reduce the interest rate or we will roll over the date at which you pay it. And what that has effectively meant is that this huge amount of debt actually remains there and however much countries improve their own economy, as they improve their own economy they just run into this wall of debt that then has to be met.

    Now that is not a great incentive so I think the time has come when we actually offer them a clear-cut, practical and significant incentive so that they can see the improvements in their own country of improvements in their own economy and I think this will do that.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think your unilateral action today will shame others into joining you?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is not a question of shaming others, I am setting out what the British position is. I believe others will follow suit, the Canadians have already said they will, I would be surprised myself if that is not a fairly general reaction and I think it will be widely welcomed by people.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Nelson Mandela – 16 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview with Nelson Mandela, held in Harare on Wednesday 16th October 1991.

    MR MANDELA:

    I just want to make a very brief statement and to say that I used this opportunity to brief the Prime Minister on the latest political developments in our country. I did so because of the involvement of the British government and the British people in the struggle against apartheid. Whatever differences may be there, one thing is clear, that the British government and the British people are the enemies of all forms of racial discrimination and I was therefore happy to be able to brief him on this question.

    I also raised the question of sanctions but because this is a matter which is still going to be discussed by the Heads of State it would be improper for me to say anything about it except to say that we discussed the matter. And I sincerely hope that you will not ask me any questions on this matter because I will not be able to be forthcoming.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you very much. We have had a number of discussions over the last year both face to face and a number of telephone conversations in order to keep up-to-date with events in South Africa. And I must say I have found that extremely useful and we have had a very useful and productive discussion again today.

    We have covered all the points that Mr Mandela has mentioned. One other point that we have been able to finalise today, Mr Mandela asked some time ago whether we would be prepared to take some ANC supporters and train them for future civil service activities in South Africa in due course. We have said yes and there will be a training programme to that end in the United Kingdom. It is in the pilot stage now but it may well grow and I think it is an indication of the extent to which we wish to cooperate in practical terms in helping prepare for a post-apartheid South Africa.

    So it has been a very useful worthwhile discussion and we will remain in close touch. There will be further discussions between the Foreign Secretary and Mr Mbeki over the next few days.

    QUESTION:

    Without pre-empting your discussions can we ask what is the present British and ANC position on the final removal of stage 3?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are not talking about that at the moment, that has been made quite clear by Mr Mandela. We are talking about that matter privately, it is best done privately.

    QUESTION:

    Are you both in agreement and are you working together to try to get South Africa into World Cup cricket next February?

    MR MANDELA:

    That is a question which has already been discussed publicly. We have recommended, as the ANC, that South Africa, as far as cricket is concerned, has complied with all the conditions which have been made by the Cricket Board and for that reason we see no reason why we should not be readmitted.

    QUESTION:

    There are leaders here which dissent from your view?

    MR MANDELA:

    You do not expect decisions to be reached easily and overnight. The fact is that we are trying to persuade everybody to agree to take the same position as ourselves.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    On that last point, decisions were reached a couple of months or so ago at the ICC meeting about the re-admittance of a non-racial South African cricket team into world cricket. The bridge was crossed then, decisions were made then that that was the right thing to do. The only question now is when that actually commences and whether that commences with the World Cup in Australia at the beginning of next year or a little later.

    Now that is not a matter for Mr Mandela and I. If you want to know my personal view I think we have crossed the Rubicon, we have made the decision, it is the right decision, you have a non-racial South African cricket team. There is no reason to my mind to bar them from playing international cricket against other teams anywhere in the world. I would be delighted to see them play in the World Cup in Australia and I think if they do they would do very well.

    QUESTION:

    Mr Mandela, are the recent outbreaks that we are reading about in South Africa an indication that the political change in that country is not coming as quickly as some people believe that it is?

    MR MANDELA:

    We have never thought that we would be able to reach a [inaudible] overnight. The fact is that we have made progress in this regard, whatever difficulties are emerging they are emerging against some solid progress which has been in the course of the discussions between the ANC and the government and I think that is what we should hold on to.

    QUESTION:

    You are not concerned that people are saying things are all right in South Africa, you are not cautioning that change is coming but too slowly?

    MR MANDELA:

    I did not expect it to be faster than it is and I am satisfied with the progress that was made and I am optimistic that this progress is going to be maintained in spite of the [inaudible].

    QUESTION:

    Will you be in any way linking the violence to the sanctions issue?

    MR MANDELA:

    That is a question that is difficult to answer. As we exchange opinions on the matter I do not think we should try and pre-judge the issue here.

    QUESTION:

    When there is a democratic government in South Africa is Britain going to stick to the same middle policies that it has elsewhere and would the ANC and government be prepared to accept that?

    MR MANDELA:

    We believe in a multiparty system, we have made this clear, and our basic policy which we published as far back as 1955 is most democratic. There is not a single political party in the country which practises democracy as we do. In fact there is not a single political organisation in the country which involves its members in the participation in democratic procedures, we have had seminars on controversial issues and just now [inaudible] the so-called imposition of a levy which is just a succession which emerged in the course of a seminar which was never taken up. But we believe in these democratic decisions, and there is not a democratic organisation in the country which has held seminars involving its members. That is an indication of our commitment to democratic government.

    QUESTION:

    What about the issue of centralised government and nationalisation?

    MR MANDELA:

    That is a question which we are discussing. You must remember that at one time the National Party which is today condemning us for advocating some form of state intervention in the economy did also call for the nationalisation of the mines.

    QUESTION:

    Would you feel it is necessary to talk to other groups besides the ANC, President de Klerk for instance?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We do, we do. We have maintained a contact throughout recent years with all shades of opinion in South Africa, it is necessary for us to do so. we want to receive a rounded opinion from Mr Mandela, President de Klerk and others, one cannot get a rounded opinion unless one talks to everyone. So the answer is yes we have, we do and we will.

    MR MANDELA:

    I would agree with that.

    QUESTION:

    Would you have any difficulty with President de Klerk or PK Botha coming here?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not chairman of the conference.

    QUESTION:

    Mr Mandela would you have any personal difficulty with President de Klerk or Mr Botha coming here to speak to Commonwealth leaders?

    MR MANDELA:

    That is a matter which would be the subject of discussion between ourselves and with the Heads of State. I do not think we should go into that.

    QUESTION:

    Do you want to see South Africa back in the Commonwealth?

    MR MANDELA:

    South Africa really belongs to the Commonwealth and it was kicked out simply because of its racial policies. Once the political situation inside the country is normalised I would strongly support our return to the Commonwealth.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Harare – 16 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Harare, held on Wednesday 16th October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    Nelson Mandela is now urging sanctions against those fuelling violence in South Africa. What is your response to that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Sanctions isn’t the main subject of the Conference this week. We are talking about the future of the Commonwealth, the development of human rights, the development of democracy throughout the Commonwealth, the direction in which the Commonwealth goes in the future; that is the substantive part of our discussion.

    There have been some changes on sanctions, the removal of people-to-people sanctions generally is welcome and progress is being made. What we need to move towards is the Constitutional Conference, a satisfactory conclusion and a new constitutionally-proper non-racial South Africa. That is what we are working for.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Brian Mulroney – 15 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview with Mr Brian Mulroney, given in Harare on Tuesday 15th October 1991.

    MR MULRONEY:

    The Prime Minister and I, we have been together for the better part of the day and we met a little earlier this evening and we are going back to a dinner meeting where we are going to be focusing on the Soviet Union and on Yugoslavia and related matters, including the Uruguay Round which is of great concern to us all.

    But we spent some time a little earlier this evening discussing the Commonwealth and the importance of this conference and we will no doubt both have an opportunity to answer your questions tonight and during the course of the week.

    The conference has not started yet, it starts tomorrow, we had a preliminary meeting today that dealt with the manner in which the communique or the declaration could emerge. I told our colleagues that given the choice between the draft submitted by the Commonwealth and the British draft I liked the British draft, it was shorter, crisper, to the point and it I believe will become the basis for the Commonwealth declaration that we will see emerge later on during the week.

    We discussed in general terms today and in general terms because the Commonwealth conference has not started, you cannot have 8 or 9 people in a room purporting to speak on behalf of the Commonwealth, the debates will begin tomorrow. But we talked about human rights in general and in specific terms, we talked about aid, we talked about development in what was I think the Prime Minister will agree a very good exchange this morning although it was preliminary because the conference has not started.

    [Mr Mulroney continued to speak in French, this portion not translated]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Brian, thank you very much indeed. I think you have set out very clearly and fairly what we have been discussing.

    We have a number of areas we particularly want to touch on, some we have discussed already, others we will discuss later over dinner, but Britain and Canada are partners in the G7, we are partners in NATO and we are partners in the Commonwealth. So there are a vast range of different areas that we will wish to take one another’s mind upon.

    We are certainly going to spend rather more time than we yet have discussing the GATT Round, that clearly is very important and I believe we will also spend some time later on this evening on the forthcoming NATO conference in Rome, that is a matter of considerable importance and of considerable interest to both of us.

    And of course we will both review what happened today in our preliminary discussions in the high level group and preview what will happen during the rest of the Commonwealth conference.

    I think the atmosphere today was extremely good. There was a great willingness, a communal willingness to cast minds forward and look at what the Commonwealth is developing into. We have had the early years of the Commonwealth, it has been there for a long time, it has matured, it is time for the Commonwealth to look at itself again, review the position and decide how it moves forward from the present position.

    And that I think will be the importance of what in due course when all colleagues have looked at it will be the Harare declaration. We had a very important declaration 20 years ago in Singapore, we now need to up-date that, refresh that and point the Commonwealth to the future. And that really will be the substance of our discussions this week and also I both hope and believe the substance of the declaration we will agree this weekend.

    QUESTION:

    There was a great deal of enthusiasm for sanctions against South Africa at past Commonwealth conferences, there does not seem to be the same type of enthusiasm for tying foreign aid to human rights as there has been for South Africa, I understand this was a British proposal?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you may not have got that entirely right. There is a very great concern about human rights, I have expressed it elsewhere, the Prime Minister has expressed it elsewhere, and that is a concern that spreads amongst the vast majority of the Commonwealth and has been expressed by them. But one has to look at precisely what our aid is geared to. It is geared firstly to help alleviate need, that is the primary purpose of the bilateral aid but we need to make sure that it is focused properly and I think it is not a question of tying aid, it is not a question of saying unless you do this, that or the other thing there will be no aid, it is a question of looking at programmes and seeking to focus aid where it will have the greatest practical effect to improve good government. And I think good government in its widest aspects, I suppose broadly we mean democratic government, accountable government, is something of great concern to the Commonwealth, it is of concern to the World Bank and of concern to others and I think that has got very much tied up in our discussions this week.

    QUESTION:

    British sources have characterised the progress made on discussions on South Africa today as slow, it does seem that momentum either on reaching perhaps changes to the New Delhi accords which you would like to see, or indeed on inviting other representatives other than Nelson Mandela here does not seem to have been achieved?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there is a dramatically changed atmosphere as far as South Africa is concerned and that has predominantly come about of course because of what has happened inside South Africa, people have seen the pillars of apartheid be repealed. And one looks forward to the time when the constitutional conference begins, is concluded and South Africa moves on to a new non-racial future.

    The climate in the Commonwealth is very much in favour of that developing as speedily as possible. I think that has been reflected in discussions, everyone knows a tremendous amount has been achieved but there is still some way to go.

    QUESTION:

    We understand from British briefings that Malaysia, for instance, was not enthusiastic about the proposal to tie aid and human rights records. Is the going a little tougher than you envisaged?

    1. MULRONEY:

    There was no such proposal, there was no such reaction from Malaysia. I don’t know what you are talking about. There was no such proposal, Dan, and there was no such reaction. In the discussions this morning – I think, John, you can correct me if I might have missed something on a coffee break or something what took place was an overview provided by the Secretary-General of his own views and that was followed by a debate both on the Declaration and on specifics. Prime Minister Major and I and others intervened very vigorously. I gave, for example, an indication of what I believe to be the case, that more and more the evolution of foreign policy will see us witness the sweeping away of any totalitarian regimes and the primacy of human rights. This is what will dominate the spectrum, dominate the concerns of national governments.

    Canada, like any national government, reserves the right to terminate completely any aid where it feels that that would be appropriate. We did it in the Commonwealth when Idi Amin came to power in Uganda; we have done it recently in Haiti, where we want the illegal occupation and usurpation of the Presidency of Haiti to end. I signalled to President Mitterrand in Houston in 1990 that Canada would not attend a summit of Francophone nations held in Zaire because of the human rights policies there – this was a year and a half ago. I sent word to the summit [Indistinct] a few weeks ago that we want Haiti excluded from the participation at the Summet de Chyu [phonetic] and so we express our points of view in different ways and they range from cutting off aid completely to channelling or focusing aid. For example, in some cases we go through the Red Cross to make sure that the aid gets to the people who are desperately in need without any of the aid getting into the hands of the government or the governing party in that particular country. That is the way Canada has done it over the years; I think Britain has followed similar policies, but it didn’t come up in any way, Dan, other than in the way I have described it to you.

    QUESTION [in French]:

    1. MULRONEY [answer also in French]:

    QUESTION:

    In your meeting tomorrow, Prime Minister, with Nelson Mandela will you be looking for increased signs of flexibility from the ANC in terms of the timing of the removal of sanctions against South Africa?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think what perhaps may not be appreciated in the United Kingdom is how much contact I have had with Nelson Mandela and indeed with others over the last year about South African matters. It is by no means an uncommon occurrence for us to pick up the phone and talk to one another about what is going on.

    I have made no secret about what I wish to see in South Africa. I wish to see the constitutional conference convened; I wish to see a conclusion; I wish to see South Africa move forward to a non-racial future.

    I will be talking to Mr. Mandela about how the constitutional conference can get under way, what progress he thinks is possible, how he thinks things will develop, what the time-scale will be and generally how he thinks we can inch forward. I think it is a mistake always to suddenly imagine one dramatic event is going to move things forward almost overnight in a huge way. It has been a continuing series of events that have moved progress forward in South Africa and I will be continuing to discuss with Mr. Mandela how we see that progress continuing. It is going in the right direction. Many people would like it to go faster, many others are surprised that it has gone as fast as it has over the past two years so there is no great drama about my meeting with him tomorrow. It is a meeting; we have had several meetings; we have spoken frequently; and we just want to carry that debate a little further.

    QUESTION:

    Mr. Prime Minister, can those citizens in Commonwealth countries where there are human rights abuses reasonably expect that the Commonwealth will emerge from this summit with effective measures to isolate those governments who persist in abusing human rights inside the Commonwealth?

    1. MULRONEY:

    I think that what you can reasonably expect is a very strong commitment and an endorsement of the primacy of human rights and the indispensable priority that it must be given not only in the Commonwealth but in other institutions around the world. I think you can probably expect as well that more and more governments are going to factor that in a major way into all of their foreign policy decisions including aid decisions.

    As I have just indicated, there are instances where, for example, the Government of Canada has been approached in regard to a decision where we were inclined as a government to terminate all aid and we were approached by the NGOs in that country and asked specifically if we would funnel aid through them as opposed to the government, to make sure that the aid got into the hands of the needy. In our programme, for example, of immunisation, where Canada put some $25 million into a programme of immunisation, the money of course was funnelled into NGO hands, into the Red Cross, into UNICEF hands as opposed to into the hands of the government or any agent or agency of the government and I think we are going to accentuate that. I think all governments are doing that. We are going to be judicious perhaps in the manner in which these decisions are arrived at but I think that the reflection that you will find from the Commonwealth itself will be a direct and a great commitment to the primacy of human rights and individual freedoms in the intercourse among nations and particularly as members of the Commonwealth. I think you can expect that from Great Britain and from Canada.

    QUESTION:

    I come from South Africa. Overall, Sir, would you be optimistic about making substantive progress on the South African issue at the Commonwealth Conference?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think the South African issue is at this Commonwealth Conference the dominant issue. It has been because people were frustrated and worried that progress was not being made. I think now there is an acknowledgement that progress is being made – I am sure South Africa will be discussed, of course it will, it is very important. The dominant issue at this Conference will actually be to determine how the Commonwealth moves forward and to agree the Harare Declaration so I am not sure quite what is meant by “progress on South Africa”. We can’t externally make progress on South Africa; the progress that we need to see towards a new constitution and a new future for South Africa has to be made within South Africa by the people who live there and I don’t think we can externally deal with that.

    QUESTION (SAME QUESTIONER):

    I mean convincing your Commonwealth colleagues on Britain’s attitude towards South Africa relating to sanctions, for instance.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think it is going to be a great issue, quite frankly, at this particular conference. There is now general agreement that people-to-people sanctions should be lifted – that is progress – and the direction in which the general thought of the Commonwealth is going is now quite clear: they are seeing progress made and they are reflecting in their own attitudes the acknowledgement that progress has been made, The European Community and others have gone a bit further than the Commonwealth and there are always going to be shades of difference but there are not great chasms of differences between us any more.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Harare – 15 October 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Harare, on Tuesday 15th October 1991.

    QUESTION:

    Can you tell us what you hope to get out of today’s talks?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think we have a lot to discuss today though the Conference doesn’t really start until tomorrow of course, but I am looking forward to a very good conference. I think it will be very constructive; I believe it may be a different sort of conference from those we have seen in the past; that the Commonwealth wants to look forward and see how it is going to develop in the future; that will be theme, I think, of the week.

    QUESTION:

    What sort of specific ideas on the future of the Commonwealth have you got?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there are several really. Good, democratic government, I think, is the main theme that will come out of it. I believe the Commonwealth will express great concern about human rights, I think that will be a second theme that will come out of it; and I hope too, to persuade Commonwealth Heads of the importance of the Environment Conference in Rio next year. I think they are all very important matters but of course other matters will come up as well.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, Mr. Mugabe has said it is not possible to buy values with money. Do you think that the British aid policy could be divisive at this meeting?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think the British aid policy can be divisive at all; it is a very substantial amount of aid. About 80 per cent of the complete amount of British aid actually goes to Commonwealth countries and I think that is something that is appreciated around the Commonwealth. Of course, you can’t buy values with money; I entirely agree with President Mugabe about that but I think the aid policy is a quite separate matter.