While recognising that the Prime Minister has many problems on his mind, may I ask him whether he is now able to answer the question he failed to answer on 21st February when I asked him a supplementary question, namely, whether the Government, being unable to take on South Africa, are contemplating the use of force against Rhodesia?
Debts are a separate question. There has been a whole succession of defaults by Rhodesia on international borrowings. As to the United Nations, as my right hon. Friend knows, it was through the United Nations that the resolution on mandatory sanctions was obtained, and this will have its effect on Rhodesia.
Since the Prime Minister has told us that the estimate of the cost of the Rhodesian crisis which he gave to the Commonwealth Prime Ministers has proved too high, why does he so doggedly —[Laughter.]—refuse to give us the revised figure? Is this not another example of his contemptuous attitude towards Parliament?
No, Sir. My contempt was to the right hon. Gentleman for his failure to tell us where he got that document from; and also to the fact that he has systematically tried to represent my statement to the Commonwealth Prime Ministers as being the cost of sanctions when it was the then estimate, which was never withdrawn, of the total cost to us of what Rhodesia has involved us in. With regard to a revised estimate we do not have final figures, but if the right hon. Gentleman cares to put down a Question I will certainly do my best to give him the up-to-date figure for 1966.
I have already made it plain that the right way to solve this problem, after the very serious efforts we made in December to do it by discussion, does not include the use of military force.