TUESDAY 18 APRIL 2000
  
                               _________
  
                           Members present:
              Mr Donald Anderson, in the Chair
              Mr David Chidgey
              Sir Peter Emery
              Mr Norman A Godman
              Mr Eric Illsley
              Mr Andrew Mackinlay
              Sir David Madel
              Mr Ted Rowlands
              Sir John Stanley
              Dr Phyllis Starkey
              Mr David Wilshire
  
                               _________
  
      MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED BY THE FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE
                       EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
  
                 MR PETER HAIN, a Member of the House, Minister of State, and MS FRANCES
           MacLEOD, Deputy Head of African Department (Southern), Foreign and
           Commonwealth Office, examined.
  
                               Chairman
        1.    Minister, we are pleased that you responded to our invitation to
  come before us because of the crisis in Zimbabwe.  We welcome you and your
  colleagues here.  We know that today is the 20th anniversary of the
  independence of Zimbabwe and recognise that the people of Zimbabwe have very
  little to celebrate on this day, given the crisis politically, economically,
  and, of course, in our bilateral relations, which pains many of us,
  particularly yourself obviously, who have been closely associated with
  liberation in Africa over the years.  What would be helpful for the Committee
  is first, if you could begin by giving us an assessment of the current
  situation.  You have helpfully circulated a statement.  If you could summarise
  the very key points of that and give us an assessment of the current position
  as a platform for questions.
        (Mr Hain)   Thank you very much, Chairman.  First of all, I welcome the
  opportunity to address you because the situation is increasingly grave.  Only
  within the last hour I have learnt that another farmer has been killed.  I
  have instructed our High Commissioner in Harare to protest in the strongest
  possible terms at the fact that apparently an ambulance, which sought to come
  to his aid while he was still alive, was blocked from getting through by war
  veterans with the police standing by.  The situation is very serious indeed. 
  It is the case that Britain, of course, is the oldest friend of Zimbabwe. 
  Last week both Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, and I spoke to Morgan
  Tsvangirai, the Leader of the Movement for Democratic Change.  I met one of
  his senior colleagues and Robin Cook also spoke to the President of the
  Commercial Farmers Union.  The messages that we are getting from the people
  of Zimbabwe is that the British Government should continue to have dialogue
  with the Zimbabwe Government and apply what pressure we can through
  international consensus.  Since losing the referendum, President Mugabe has
  sought to divert attention from the growing internal opposition by trying to
  present Britain as his opponent in the coming election which, of course, we
  are not.  The international community, including the United States, the
  Commonwealth and African states, share our concerns at the deteriorating
  situation.  Only last Monday, Britain's policy was unanimously backed by our
  European Union partners.  On Sunday, both the Foreign Secretary and I spoke
  to President Obasanjo of Nigeria, and he told us that his Foreign Minister
  Lamido was due to arrive in Harare today.  We are all united in urging the
  Government of Zimbabwe to end the lawlessness and stop the violence, much of
  it officially incited.  The killing over the weekend of a white farmer and the
  savage beating of his colleagues was tragic.  So, of course, is the death
  within the last few hours of another farmer.  Equally disturbing, and I will
  just focus briefly on this, was the killing, apparently by Government
  supporters, of two Opposition members driving in an Opposition vehicle.  Eight
  members of the Opposition have been killed in the last two weeks and more than
  100 hospitalised.  Opposition leaders are now in fear of assassination, so it 
  is absolutely vital that we continue to seek opportunities for constructive
  dialogue.  We cannot have dialogue when the hand of friendship is rejected. 
  Therefore, we welcome President Mugabe's agreement to send a delegation to
  London, probably next week.  We agree with the people of Zimbabwe that
  elections should be held within the time allowed by the constitution and that
  they should be free and fair.  We have already secured agreement from our EU
  partners to offer international monitors and we are discussing the same issue
  with the Commonwealth.  We hope that President Mugabe will accept this offer. 
  I am pleased that yesterday the Speaker of the Zimbabwean Parliament was
  reported as saying that he unreservedly welcomed foreign observers.  Britain
  stands ready with our international partners to support a team of election
  monitors, just we have done during the past year, for example, in South Africa
  and Mozambique.  The very future of Zimbabwe depends on the elections being
  free and fair.  Britain with not interfere in these elections.  The destiny
  of Zimbabwe lies in the hands of its own people.  I hope that Zimbabwe will
  be transformed from its present serious condition into a powerhouse in Africa
  for economic prosperity, good governance, and respect for human rights.  If
  new policies emerge to achieve that, Zimbabwe will find in Britain not just
  an old friend but a new partner. 
        2.    I am obliged.  Minister, last week when President Mugabe was in
  Cuba, Vice Present Msika urged the squatters to end their occupation.  Now you
  are saying that the Speaker is prepared to welcome international observers to
  the elections.  Has there been anything positive from President Mugabe?
        (Mr Hain)   In respect of international observers?
        3.    In respect of international observers, in respect of urging
  restraint on the squatters, and generally seeking to help to ease the
  situation.
        (Mr Hain)   President Mugabe has apparently told foreign African leaders,
  colleagues of his, that he might be willing to accept Commonwealth observers. 
  We will have to see what transpires.  Of course, he met leaders of the
  Commercial Farming Union last night, (yesterday), and they had a good meeting
  and constructive talks.  However, there has been a problem throughout these
  past weeks about the question of the squatting.  On the other hand, the Vice
  President has been very clear.
        4.    The Vice President does not rule, with respect.
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed.
        5.    Has there been anything at all positive or constructive, in
  attempting to lessen the crisis, from President Mugabe?
        (Mr Hain)   The meeting yesterday with the farmers appeared to reduce the
  tension, certainly the farmers' leaders thought so.  I cannot, however, say
  that President Mugabe has displayed the leadership that he ought to have done
  to ensure that the law was enforced, to ensure that the violence was ended. 
  Indeed, many of his statements have appeared to incite an escalation of the
  problem in contrast to the Vice President who, in a conversation with me over
  the phone and in public statements, has said that the law should be upheld. 
  Of course, the President is now in a position, as are many of his Ministers,
  of defying not just the rule of law in a general sense but a decision of his
  own high court, which is a very serious matter.
        6.    He does this, notwithstanding there is a real danger of a crisis
  of confidence.  40 per cent of the export earnings of Zimbabwe come from
  commercial farmers, mainly tobacco.  If they default on their bank loans,
  there will be a further financial crisis.  This could affect, in terms of
  morale, not only inward investment but it could lead to an exodus of trained
  people both in Zimbabwe and, presumably, the infection could spread to
  neighbouring countries too.
        (Mr Hain)   I think you are absolutely right.  This is an issue not just
  of serious crisis for Zimbabwe but for the entire region.  For example, the
  Malawians tell us that many, many (perhaps millions) of their citizens are
  actually working on the farms as farm labourers.  If we saw the pictures on
  television yesterday of the white farmers' farmsteads abandoned now with its
  farm workers' homes burnt, its tobacco crops rotting under canvass or some
  other protection, Zimbabwe's whole economy depends critically on the
  successful agricultural sector and its foreign exchange reserves, which are
  virtually empty, on successful exports of tobacco and agricultural produce. 
  So this is a situation which is not only creating internal instability but a
  real crisis of huge economic proportions for the whole country and the region.
        7.    Given the further tragedy of the death of a farmer, and the
  possible effects on investment in South Africa itself, are you surprised that
  the political leadership in South Africa has not stirred itself more?
        (Mr Hain)   President Mbeki did visit Harare some weeks ago and he plans
  another visit in the near future.  I know from my own discussions with
  leadership at the top level of the neighbouring countries - and indeed with
  President Obasanjo of Nigeria, and the discussion that the Foreign Secretary
  had with the Secretary General of the Organisation of African Unity - that all
  African countries share our concerns completely and are seeking to bring what
  influence they can. 
  
                            Sir Peter Emery
        8.    There is no reason why you should know, but I was one of the
  Members of the House that was asked by the Prime Minister to monitor the first
  elections, the last election in South Rhodesia and the election by which
  President Mugabe came to power and Zimbabwe was, in fact, created.  I saw the
  discipline of those people who are the remains of the war veterans.  Can you
  really believe that they are taking this action without the approval of the
  President?
        (Mr Hain)   No.
        9.    So that means to say that we must realise that Mugabe is in the
  dock, accused of really taking no action to stop this, and having been willing
  to allow it to happen?
        (Mr Hain)   Sir Peter, I think it is quite clear that one of the reasons
  for the illegal farm invasions in the first place, were acts of orchestration
  from the very highest level of the ruling Zanu/PF party.  That could not have
  happened, given the way Zimbabwe is governed, without the President's
  authority.  Indeed, one of the regrettable features about this deteriorating
  situation is that he, at least until yesterday, when he met the leaders of the
  Commercial Farmers Union, has not been prepared to use his full authority as
  President to stop this lawlessness and stop the violence which has now
  resulted in deaths.
        10.      What steps have you taken to see what action the United Nations
  could take, or whether Kofi Annan could use his influence on the President?
        (Mr Hain)   Sir Peter, what we have done from the beginning, in
  conversations that I have had personally with Zimbabwe Ministers, and that the
  Foreign Secretary had with President Mugabe had in Cairo only two weeks ago,
  in the conversations we have had with the Commonwealth, with the Organisation
  of African Union neighbouring African states, and discussions which have
  occurred at the United Nations in New York through our permanent
  representative, what we have sought to do consistently is to say that this is
  not in the interests of Zimbabwean people.  President Mugabe has sought to
  present the current situation as if Britain is the enemy.  Britain is a long
  standing friend.  He must not be allowed to present it in that fashion.  It
  is very important that all the statements that Members of Parliament make, if
  I may say so, bear that in mind.  That we will not fall into his trap of
  seeking to present this crisis as if it is one of Zimbabwe versus Britain,
  when all of our international colleagues share our concerns.
        11.      I understand that.  But if we are really friends of the
  Zimbabwean people, we must have this brought to an end as soon as possible.
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed.
        12.      Because of the confrontation that Mugabe is trying to create
  between himself and Britain generally, ought we not to be trying, as Lord
  Carrington suggested, to help other Africans - I use Kofi Annan as a very good
  example - to argue the case of the law and the case of the people of Zimbabwe
  rather than Britain alone.  We should be using every force outside ourselves
  to try to bring influence, and particularly Africans, to bring influence on
  him.
        (Mr Hain)   That is precisely why I very much welcome the visits to
  Zimbabwe by the Nigerian Foreign Minister; a visit which followed
  conversations that the Foreign Secretary and I had with President Obasanjo on
  Sunday; in turn, following President Obasanjo's convening of the meeting
  between the Foreign Secretary and President Mugabe.  I agree with you
  completely.  That is precisely what we have been seeking to do.  In the end
  this is a problem, which is an African problem, needing an African solution.
        13.      Kofi Annan has been used to try and bring some influence?
        (Mr Hain)   I do not want to go into what might or might not be happening
  at the United Nations.  I think the focus should be on African countries at
  the present time. 
  
                              Mr Rowlands
        14.      I too was an observer at the 1980 independence.  We knew Mr
  Mugabe very well in the 1970s and it is very sad to see the arrogance of
  someone who has been in power for too long.  Is it a one man Government?  Is
  there any other body in the Government who can stand up and speak to Mr Mugabe
  and say, "Look, this is what you are doing to your country"? 
        (Mr Hain)   Mr Rowlands, I appreciate your old expert knowledge and
  involvement in this matter, but I do not want us to personalise this crisis
  because that is exactly what has allowed the President to inflame an already
  serious situation.  So to answer your question directly, President Mugabe is
  in charge of the country, quite clearly.  There are, however, alternative
  voices, both within his Government and within his own party, let alone within
  the Opposition, which is now a stronger opposition than Zimbabwe has had since
  independence.
        15.      When you said you did not want to personalise it, some of your
  own language has been pretty strong stuff. "Intemperate", "irrational",
  "lifting two fingers to the courts".  These are the phrases you have used in
  denunciation, not just of the Government but President Mugabe himself.
  Therefore, I do not quite understand your response to my first question.  You,
  yourself, have lead the denunciation of his behaviour.
        (Mr Hain)   I have been very robust, as has the Foreign Secretary.  You
  were quite right to quote those.  I think it is important that we were robust
  from the beginning.  It is important that no double standards are shown when
  black African leaders abuse human rights, provoke policies which cause
  violence and now deaths.  That is no different from the old dictatorship of
  Ian Smith and the racist repression which he was responsible for.  It is
  important that we do not have double standards, which is why I have been
  robust.  But it is very important now that instead of knee-jerk gestures,
  which I do not suggest you are asking for but have come from some Opposition
  figures outside this Committee, instead we have measured messages.  This is
  because we do not want the situation to be inflamed further.
        16.      That implies that influence can help and assist.  How is our
  access to the President these days?  For example, has our High Commissioner
  got direct access to the President?  Has he managed to meet him in the last
  three or four weeks as this crisis unfolded?  Is there a personal relationship
  between the High Commissioner and the President or is that fractured too?
        (Mr Hain)   He has not been able to meet the President in recent times. 
  I, myself, met the President on 29 October in London.  Unfortunately, the
  following day there was a demonstration by the Gay Rights Campaign, by Peter
  Tatchell, which caused a further series of outbursts from the President.  I
  met him again in January in the margins of the New York Security Council.  I
  have had regular conversations with Zimbabwe Ministers but I cannot say, other
  than the meeting which was held under the chairmanship of President Obasanjo
  in Cairo, that we can claim a strong personal basis for dialogue with the
  President.  That is regrettable.
        17.      May I seek clarification as to what emerged from the Cairo
  meeting because I heard slightly conflicting sounds coming from it.  The
  build-up to that meeting was one of forthright denunciation of the kind I
  described.  You and the Foreign Secretary made those denunciations.  Then
  following that meeting there seemed to be an almost act of reconciliation
  between Mr Mugabe and ourselves, that we would do something further on land
  reform, as long as he exercised his influence.  In those meetings was there
  a clear understanding of what President Mugabe was going to do to try to calm
  the situation, and how we would then respond to that calming or not?  It seems
  that since the Cairo meeting things have got worse, not better.
        (Mr Hain)   The importance of the Cairo meeting was to try to establish
  a basis for dialogue.  I cannot claim that the results showed that it was a
  roaring success.  Nor did we anticipate that the situation would necessarily
  change dramatically as a result of one albeit lengthy conversation.  But the
  concrete things that came out of that were President Mugabe's acceptance of
  an invitation from the Foreign Secretary to send a senior delegation to visit
  us in London and to discuss land reform, the economic crisis, the
  deteriorating lawlessness, the violence, and all these other problems which
  are besetting the country, so that was one concrete outcome.  There was a
  discussion.  There was a dialogue.  That is to be welcomed.  I should also
  just say very briefly that when I have had private discussions with our
  colleagues in the United States, with my opposite numbers in Europe, with
  senior members of African Governments, they too have had difficulty in
  establishing a constructive dialogue with President Mugabe.  This has been the
  heart of the problem in many respects. 
  
                              Dr Starkey
        18.      One of the big issues behind all of this is land reform.  May I
  ask a few questions about land reform in Zimbabwe.  The Foreign Secretary
  issued a statement in April saying that: "Britain is prepared to help fund a
  land reform programme which is within the rule of law ... [and] to support
  reform, provided it genuinely addresses the problem of rural poverty."  What
  progress has there actually been so far in Zimbabwe since independence on real
  land reform, that is, land reform which addresses the problem of rural
  poverty?
        (Mr Hain)   In the beginning, in the 1980s, there was some progress on
  that.  During the period the previous Government supplied some œ44 million
  worth of funding to support it.  However, it became increasingly obvious that
  the land reform programme was not achieving its objective which, as you quite
  rightly stress, was to tackle rural poverty and redress the historic imbalance
  that had been left over from both colonialism and the racist white minority
  rule of Ian Smith, of a massive unfairness in the distribution of land.  I
  think we should all acknowledge that there is and was that legacy.  But the
  land reform programme that was being pursued by that Government was not really
  addressing these matters, so we withdraw our support for it.
        19.      What date would that be?  That you withdrew support?  Roughly.
        (Mr Hain)   From recollection, round about 1988.  Of course, it is a
  matter, for which the Secretary of State for International Development is
  responsible.  I will happily answer in general terms.  I would like to add one
  or two points.  She could, no doubt, supply you with any more detailed
  evidence in writing if you needed it.  There was then a land conference called
  in 1988 to try and address this matter - donor countries and the Zimbabwe
  Government and non-governmental organisations - where it was clear it was
  going off the rails.  Unfortunately, in the last two years, as the programme
  has been progressed - without British support, I might add, because we could
  not support it - around half the properties dispersed have gone to friends of
  the Government; some places to senior officials, retired officials.  Very
  little of it, if any, is farmed; so the problems of rural poverty have not
  been addressed.  The problems of landless citizens have not been addressed by
  that land distribution.  In addition, the country has lost a much needed
  source of efficient farming production.
  
                               Chairman
        20.      And foreign exchange.
        (Mr Hain)   Yes.  As I said earlier on - I cannot stress this too highly
  -  Zimbabwe has very, very serious economic problems at the present time with
  interest rates sky high.  It is around 79 per cent.  With inflation at 60 per
  cent, domestic debts at a third of GDP, unemployment at 50 per cent, and only
  a day or two of foreign exchange reserves left; and huge debts owed to the
  outside world, especially countries in the region, which relates back to your
  first question, which is especially worrying, Mozambique and South Africa: 
  it is this policy, which is being pursued, that is incomprehensible.  It does
  not address the problems of rural poverty.  It does not support the need for
  efficient farm production.  It is resulting in violence and lawlessness and
  now killings.  It is an absolutely catastrophic policy.
        21.      The land reform programme and the agreement with the British
  Government on the funding of land by acquisition, was presumably part of the
  Lancaster House Agreement.  Were those commitments by the British Government,
  made at the Lancaster House Agreement, fully discharged?  And what about the
  commitments made by the Zimbabwe Government?  Were they fully discharged? 
        (Mr Hain)   As Lord Carrington, the Foreign Secretary at the time,
  recently confirmed in the media, the claims that President Mugabe has made
  effectively about the willingness to compensate on the basis he is now wanting
  - seizing land and then compensating, passing the bill to Britain - there was
  no commitment made of that kind.  There was always an understanding that there
  was a problem which had to be addressed, and would be addressed, not just
  bilaterally but with other donor countries, (as indeed we started to do), and
  that funding was provided until the programme went awry.
        22.      So, in your view, where does the blame lie for the fact that the
  land reform process has not delivered what it was supposed to deliver, which
  is the alleviation of rural poverty?
        (Mr Hain)   I think the blame lies clearly with the Government, which has
  been in power for the last 20 years, headed by its current President.  It is
  interesting to contrast the situation with neighbouring African countries,
  (South Africa included), where a similar problem of imbalance in the
  distribution of land between what were the ruling whites and now the majority
  of the country having a democratic say in running it, a similar imbalance
  existed but those countries have not addressed it in this inflammatory and
  catastrophic fashion.  They have gone about it progressively with
  international support.  We have always said - and I repeat it today and
  confirm - that Britain stands ready, in a measured way, to support a genuine
  land reform programme, including some funding, if it actually addressed rural
  poverty; if it resulted in farms which were going to be in production; and if
  it was not handed out to various Government cronies; then we would be able to
  help.  It is significant that the Americans, who have been providing the
  funding, withdraw their funding only a week ago because they could no longer
  support this process. 
        23.      In the light of past experience, is it realistic to suppose that
  either ourselves or the Americans will be able to come to an agreement with
  the current Zimbabwe Government, where we can fund genuine land reform and be
  confident they would carry it out?
        (Mr Hain)   We can continue to try, as we will do when the delegation
  comes, as has been said from Harare it will do, possibly next week.  We will
  continue to try.  It is quite possible that whoever rules the country after
  the coming elections - and that is a decision for the Zimbabwean people and
  not for us - will have to adopt new policies in order to save the country and
  in order to gain the international communities' confidence, both in the region
  and through donor nations, such as Britain, and also through the International
  Monetary Fund and World Bank, which will want to provide financial assistance
  but have been prevented from doing so by the Zimbabwean Government's
  unwillingness to reform economic policies.
  
                           Sir John Stanley
        24.      Minister, you said just a moment ago that Britain stands ready
  to make British taxpayers' money available for land reform.  When you say
  "stands ready", are you saying that as we speak this morning, notwithstanding
  the events of recent weeks and the last few days in particular, the British
  Government's offer of British taxpayers' money for land reform is still on the
  table there today for Mr Mugabe?  Is that the position?
        (Mr Hain)   No.  I confirm that we will support a programme of land
  reform which is transparent, as I have said, cost effective, and contributes
  to poverty reduction.  But we cannot support any Government sponsored
  programme while land invasions continue, especially since, as I said, half the
  land has been recently distributed to Government supporters; while the
  violence has been effectively either condoned or officially incited; and while
  the squatting is being pursued in defiance of the court without Government
  action or police action to stop it.  We cannot offer support for land reform.
  There has to be complete change of policy.
        25.      You are saying then that the offer that the Foreign Secretary
  made at Cairo has now been withdrawn for the time being? 
        (Mr Hain)   No.  I am saying that if this lawlessness stops, if the
  Zimbabwean Government finds itself ready to discuss genuine land reform, then
  we will do so.  We will explore with the delegation, when it meets the Foreign
  Secretary, whether there is going to be a change of policy.
        26.      Minister, the offer of British taxpayers' money, made by the
  Foreign Secretary, is either on the table or it has been withdrawn.  It must
  be one or the other.  As I understood you to say, it has been withdrawn, but
  you are now saying it is on offer.  Could you clarify which it is, please.
        (Mr Hain)   I think I made it absolutely clear.  If there is a change of
  policy, then we will have discussions about whether we can support it.  It is
  not on offer whilst the present Zimbabwean Government pursues the policy that
  it is doing.  May I say in respect of taxpayers' money, of course œ44 million
  of taxpayers' money was paid by the last Conservative Government in the 1980s,
  so this is not a matter between parties. 
        27.      So, as of today, the offer has been withdrawn?
        (Mr Hain)   As of today, we stand ready to discuss it if the policy
  changes.  We have not made an offer where we have said we will hand over the
  money.  We have made an offer and we will have serious discussions and
  consultations about how we could support it.  We have not simply said, "There
  is a pot of money available."  We will hand it over if conditions change.  The
  Secretary of State for International Development and her officials, it is a
  matter for her ultimately, and she will have to be absolutely assured that
  this limited finance was going to be directed at helping the rural landless
  poor, not diverted in the way that it has been.
        28.      I do not understand, Minister, your difficulty in acknowledging
  that the offer has been withdrawn.  You made it quite clear that the
  conditions attached to your offer do not apply.  That the present Government
  in Zimbabwe is not complying with the rule of law.  That the invasions of
  white farmland are continuing.  In those circumstances the offer is not
  available.  So I do not understand your difficulty in making it clear that the
  British Government, like the American Government at this time, has withdrawn
  its offer. 
        (Mr Hain)   Unlike the American Government, we were not funding it, that
  is the point.  If it helps you, Sir John, I am quite happy to say that we will
  not fund any land reform, to the extent that any offer has been made, because
  all we have offered to do is to discuss it.  Those discussions cannot occur
  unless the policy changes.  We want to have a dialogue about how to change it.
        29.      So it is not on offer at the present time?
        (Mr Hain)   No. 
        30.      Thank you.  What sum of money was discussed between the Foreign
  Secretary and Mr Mugabe in terms of the scale of the British Government's
  funding? 
        (Mr Hain)   No sums of money were discussed. 
        31.      No sums at all?
        (Mr Hain)   No.  Just to go back to your earlier point, this was because
  President Mugabe showed no willingness to change his policy on squatting and
  the deteriorating lawlessness on land invasions.  Therefore, we could not have
  a discussion about it.  That is why we invited the delegation over to explore
  what might be possible.
        32.      I am not trying to drive any wedges between you and the Foreign
  Secretary, but there are some very significant differences in wording between
  the basis on which the Foreign Secretary said that British taxpayers' money
  might be made available for land reform in the House on April 11, and what you
  have said in front of the Committee this morning in your own written
  statement.  You have said:  "I confirm again that we will support a programme
  of land reform which is transparent, cost effective and contributes to poverty
  reduction."  You use the words "transparent" and "cost effective".  I fully
  accept the Foreign Secretary has also highlighted the need to contribute
  towards poverty reduction.  But within the House on April 11, in answer to the
  Honourable Member for Burnley, Mr Peter Pike, the Foreign Secretary said:  "We
  remain willing to help further but it must be a programme first that involves
  the rule of law and a fair price to a willing seller."  That is a very, very
  critical statement.  In other words, that the British taxpayer and the British
  Government's position is that land reform will be funded only in so far as it
  was a genuinely voluntary process based on a fair price.  That is wholly
  different from phrases like "cost effective" which could indeed be knock-down
  prices.  Your statement makes no reference at all to land reform being
  dependent on wholly voluntary transactions.
        (Mr Hain)   There is absolutely no difference between what the Foreign
  Secretary said and what I said.  I am happy to endorse what he said.  The
  point I was making in this statement is that it has to be cost effective from
  the point of view of the British taxpayer.  That is what has to be cost
  effective. 
        33.      Can you elaborate on that.  What do you understand to be cost
  effective as far as the British taxpayer is concerned?  The Foreign
  Secretary's statement is a clear statement of evaluation that it must be (he
  has used the phrase) a fair price to a willing seller, which is the valuation
  statement which everybody understands.  It is a valuation arrived at on the
  basis of a free negotiation between a willing buyer and a willing seller.
        (Mr Hain)   Because it has to be on that basis - and I am happy both to
  agree with you and agree with the Foreign Secretary - but what we are not
  willing to do is hand over the money in a way that President Mugabe is
  demanding and then have the Government of Zimbabwe deal with it as it wishes. 
  By cost effective we mean that we will only support a land reform programme
  which genuinely addresses the problem of the rural poor.
        34.      Can you give us your thinking as to how you would ensure that the
  British taxpayers' money handed over in these circumstances was used in the
  way that the present British Government wanted, and on the basis of the
  valuation criteria that the Foreign Secretary stated in the House.  How would
  you achieve that?
        (Mr Hain)   That would be for the discussions that need to occur and
  which so far we have not been able to engage in because of this policy of
  illegal squatting, which I do not want to go over again, and because there
  have been no signs that President Mugabe as yet, although the delegation might
  have a different outcome next week, has been willing to depart from his policy
  of effectively saying, "We are seizing the land, give us the money."  We are
  not willing to even discuss a land reform programme on that basis.
  
                               Dr Godman
        35.      Following on from Sir John's questions on land reform, may I say
  I am in agreement with what you say about supporting a programme of land
  reform which is transparent, cost effective, and contributes to poverty
  reduction.  We all condemn the savage killings of Opposition politicians,
  farmers, and farm workers.  Obviously our sympathies go to their families. 
  Just a couple of questions on statistics.  The 4,400 white farmers.  Am I
  right in saying that they own over 30 per cent of the best arable land and
  that as employers they have a pretty poor record?  That many of them have
  treated their black workers, putting it bluntly, in a brutal fashion?
        (Mr Hain)   That was certainly the case in the past.  Many of them have
  a mixed record more recently.  But what has been interesting about recent
  times is that the illegal squatting has been resisted as much by the black
  farm workers as by the farmers themselves because the workers see their own
  jobs as being in jeopardy.  When the television pictures overnight showed
  their own homes burnt down, in other words, Zimbabwean citizens burning down
  their own neighbours' homes, the senselessness of this action was revealed.
        36.      In your opening statement I think you said that there are
  millions of Malawians employed on these white-owned farms.  Was that a slip
  of the tongue?  Was it thousands? 
        (Mr Hain)   No:  The Malawian Government has told us that there may be
  millions.  Because the borders are so porous, it is difficult for us to
  confirm that figure.  That is why I am very careful to say the Malawian
  Government.  It is sufficiently concerned to have said that it is very worried
  about the impact of unemployed workers coming back into their own quarters. 
  They do not have jobs for them.
        37.      So you accept that there are millions of immigrant workers on
  these 4,400 farms?
        (Mr Hain)   I accept that this is what the Malawian Government have told
  us.  It may be that there are also lots of Mozambiquans.
        38.      You would agree that if we are talking about land reform - and
  the kind of land reform that you want to see and we want to see, equitable and
  corruption free land reform - that this will inevitably lead to many of these
  white farmers being removed? 
        (Mr Hain)   That has to be done by agreement. 
        39.      I am saying, if you are going to have land reform, then by land
  reform we are inevitably discussing the redistribution of the ownership or the
  tenure of the land.  That means many of these farmers will have to go.
        (Mr Hain)   Many of them will obviously sell their properties if it is
  done in a proper fashion.  What is also important is that there are whole
  farming areas which are undeveloped at the moment, being not in production.
        40.      Is not most of the communal land exhausted?
        (Mr Hain)   The real problem is that there is a lot of farming land not
  in proper production, so a genuine reform programme will have to see a
  redistribution of land in the way you have described, but also more farming
  land brought into production.  Perhaps I could quote you a few more statistics
  which may help.  Around 30 per cent of commercial farm workers are Malawian
  or Mozambiquan.
        41.      30 per cent.
        (Mr Hain)   Yes, 30 per cent, so it is a serious situation affecting the
  entire region, which the Chairman drew our attention to at the beginning.
        42.      If these figures are right, these are huge employers of labour.
        (Mr Hain)   They are huge employers of labour, yes.
  
                              Mr Illsley
        43.      On the back of that question, we have been just been speaking of
  the idea that there is going to be a willingness to sell out at a fair price,
  and that there will be fair compensation for a landowner who is taken away
  from his land.  At the moment, those white farmers do not want to leave the
  land. Obviously, if it is down to a situation whereby they had to be willing
  to sell and be fairly compensated, you could have stalemate years from now
  because they do not want to move from that land as it is now.  There is
  unlikely to be any pace of reform of the land surely.
        (Mr Hain)   I think a sensible policy would be able to address this
  matter.  As the Commercial Farm Workers Union said only yesterday, there are
  many thousands of hectares of land in Government ownership which are simply
  not being farmed.  So that is the first priority.  Then we continue through
  to redistribute.  May I add one other brief point.  It is absolutely vital,
  when this redistribution of land reform process takes place, that the farming
  land remains in production; providing jobs and providing agricultural output,
  which amongst other things, can be exported and feed the neighbouring people.
  
                               Dr Godman
        44.      One last question on this section.  Free market solutions and
  structural adjustment programmes advocated by the World Bank and the
  International Monetary Fund they are inappropriate, are they not, in cases
  such as this which we face in Zimbabwe?  Elsewhere, your African experience
  would suggest that such free market solutions, as advocated by these two
  institutions, are inappropriate.
        (Mr Hain)   I would not want to put it as straightforwardly as that, if
  I may say so.  What has been interesting is how other African countries, for
  example, Kenya, are at the late stages of so far successful negotiations with
  the IMF on financial support of presumably the same kind.  Other African
  countries in the region have been able to benefit from the IMF and the World
  Bank's support.  I think Zimbabwe could do so as well but not under the
  present policies.  Just imposing, as it were, a primitive free market agenda
  on a country like Zimbabwe would not be appropriate, but that is not what the
  IMF and the World Bank have suggested.
  
                            Sir David Madel
        45.      In 1993 the Harare Declaration of 1991 was incorporated into new
  principles for potential new members of the Commonwealth.  Obviously it also
  applied to the existing ones.  Do you think, by his present action, that
  President Mugabe has put himself outside the Harare Declaration?
        (Mr Hain)   The Harare Declaration, of course, provided the basis for the
  Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group: first of all, to recommend that Nigeria
  be suspended from the Commonwealth; and, secondly, more recently, that
  Pakistan be suspended from the Councils of the Commonwealth, because they both
  suffered from military coups.  That was the key defining criterion.  Of
  course, the Declaration includes another principle.
        46.      Human rights, the rule of law.
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed.  I do think Zimbabwe is in breach of many of those
  principles.  Unfortunately or fortunately, whichever way you look at it, that
  does not provide the basis for suspending Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth
  because the rules at the present time do not allow that.
        47.      You mentioned that it was primarily an African problem but
  because it is in breach of Harare it is a Commonwealth problem.  Would you
  expect a very early meeting indeed of the Commonwealth High Commissioners at
  the Commonwealth headquarters in London?
        (Mr Hain)   There is a meeting of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action
  Group at which the Foreign Secretary will be present in London on the 2 and
  3 May.  Harare and Zimbabwe will certainly be discussed there.
        48.      You mentioned that because of the position in relation to Malawi,
  there is now a threat of instability in that region of Africa if it goes on. 
  Would that be correct?  If this goes on, it could destabilise an area outside
  Zimbabwe.
        (Mr Hain)    This is what is concerning many of the neighbouring African
  countries:  Malawi, in a way that you have described; and Mozambique, to which
  I have referred.  And the South Africans.  South Africa has close trading
  links with Zimbabwe.  In my visit, a little over two months ago, Ministers
  there expressed privately their real concern and shared our own policy
  perspective on the situation.
        49.      That being the case, is the Government going to raise the matter
  with the General Assembly of the United Nations, or the Security Council, or
  both?
        (Mr Hain)   What I think ought to be done is what we are doing step by
  step in a measured way.  We have approached Commonwealth.  We have approached
  the Organisation for African Unity.  We have had discussions with the
  President of Nigeria.  Other discussions are taking place with leaders of
  African countries for precisely the reasons you allude to.
        50.      You would welcome a greater sense of speed by the Commonwealth
  High Commissions, given what you have told us this morning?  Waiting until May
  2.  Why can we not have a meeting tomorrow of the High Commissioners?
        (Mr Hain)   The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group is the only body,
  under the rules of the Commonwealth, charged with being able to act in this
  fashion.  That is the priority.  All of the High Commissioners in London, as
  well as our diplomatic colleagues in posts both in Zimbabwe and the
  neighbouring countries, indeed in Europe, know about these and share them.
        Sir David Madel:           Thank you.
  
                              Mr Chidgey
        51.      Minister, how strong do you believe President Mugabe's position
  to be in Zimbabwe?
        (Mr Hain)   I do not want to comment upon the position of a foreign
  President.
        52.      Can I ask you then, is the Foreign Secretary's decision to meet
  the Opposition meant to be an indication of this Government's support for this
  Opposition?
        (Mr Hain)   No.  We do not have any view on whether the Opposition or the
  ruling party should win the elections or be the dominant force.  That is a
  matter for the Zimbabwean people.  We have discussions with Opposition parties
  in virtually all the countries with which we have diplomatic relations.
        53.      You said earlier in your discussion with us that President Mugabe
  was definitely the person in charge.  I understand that point.  I understand
  also that there is quite a deal of internal democracy within Zanu/PF.  I
  wondered if you had any views on how we could encourage the growth of
  democracy with Zanu/PF.
        (Mr Hain)   What Britain should be doing is sticking to the policy, which
  I have enunciated, that we are the friends of the Zimbabwean people.  We bear
  no hostility towards individual members of the ruling party.  There is
  considerable dissent, I can confirm, within the ruling party at a very senior
  level, of the direction of the country.  To be honest, from what I can tell,
  virtually every Zimbabwean is concerned about the direction of the present
  policy.  So the debate which is now happening, can I briefly emphasise: if I
  may say so, the key objective that we should all focus upon now is the
  important next step in Zimbabwe's future, which is the coming elections.  It
  is absolutely vital that those elections are free and fair.  That is our
  principal policy objective.  I do not think that the present situation can
  easily be resolved in a way that we would all like - Zimbabweans and ourselves
  - without the elections being conducted in a free and fair fashion and the
  outcome being respected.
        54.      In that context, you have mentioned several times this morning
  the importance of the other regional countries.  May I ask you whether you
  feel, as I do, that the influence and engagement of South Africa is absolutely
  vital to this process, both for South Africa's interest as the largest trading
  partner within Zimbabwe, but also as being able to take a lead, as you
  yourself have said, in providing an African solution to an African problem. 
  I wonder if you could be a little more open or broad in how important South
  Africa sees their role in trying to resolve this situation?
        (Mr Hain)   I think the fact that President Mbeki plans to make his
  second visit to Harare, within a short space of time, speaks for itself.
        55.      No more?
        (Mr Hain)   No more, no less.
  
                              Mr Illsley
        56.      Just on the back of that question, how big a fear is there that
  President Mugabe will abrogate the constitution and not call the election?
        (Mr Hain)   President Mugabe assured the Foreign Secretary that he would
  call elections soon.  In fact, he indicated in Cairo, next month.  We see no
  reason to doubt his word, in that respect, given to the Foreign Secretary. 
  Could I just say that the elections must be held within four months of the
  dissolution of Parliament.  That is by 11 August.  The date of the election
  must be fixed by 7 July, otherwise there will be a breach of the constitution.
  
                               Chairman
        57.      On 2 May specifically in the Cairo Conference?
        (Mr Hain)   No specific date but next month was the period given to the
  Foreign Secretary. 
  
                              Mr Wilshire
        58.      Minister, would you agree that there are human rights abuses
  taking place in Zimbabwe at the moment?
        (Mr Hain)   I thought that was pretty evident.
        59.      Do you agree that there is an incitement to racial hatred taking
  place?
        (Mr Hain)   In respect of the way that white peaceful demonstrators in
  the peaceful march through Harare a few weeks ago were deliberately targeted
  by supporters of the ruling party, I think, yes.  There are clear instances
  of racist attacks.  In respect of white farmers being targeted and the general
  climate that many whites in Zimbabwe now feel, obviously the situation is
  deteriorating.
        60.      Would you agree that what we are now seeing is the beginnings of
  ethnic cleansing?
        (Mr Hain)    I do not want to use that phrase.  This phrase has been used
  in an inflammatory way by the Opposition.  I think we should take this
  opportunity, if I may say so, to adopt a measured response.  To compare what
  is happening in Zimbabwe with what happened in Kosovo I would have thought was
  ludicrous.  It does not make it any more acceptable to find the lawlessness
  and violence and now deaths of all sorts of people.  I do not think the
  targeting of the predominantly black (though multi-racial) Opposition, with
  the whole succession of killings, with up to 100 people violently attacked,
  I do not think you can describe that as ethnic cleansing because it is often
  black on black, but it is equally serious.
        61.      Chairman, I would just observe that it was not me who mentioned
  Kosovo, it was the Minister.  The point I want to put to the Minister is this:
  that if we do have human rights abuses taking place, if we do have incitements
  to racial hatred - whether or not we have ethnic cleansing beginning is
  clearly a matter on which we do not agree - but is your thesis that, given
  those things are taking place in Zimbabwe, what we need are robust words? 
  Should the world community just simply talk about this, or is it not the time
  when the world community does something about it? 
        (Mr Hain)   First of all, I do not see how you can describe the
  cleaning-out of black farm workers on the farm of the white farmer who was
  recently killed as being ethnic cleansing.  I cannot see how you describe it
  as that.  I think we should get away from inflammatory rhetoric like that. 
  As for robust words, Mr Rowlands referred to the fact that I have been very
  robust.  Some people have said I have been too robust. I have felt it my
  responsibility to give a very clear message.  I do agree with you, Mr
  Wilshire, that the international community does need to take its own
  responsibilities seriously, which is exactly why we approached all of the
  different international fora in the way that I described.
        62.      You say you agree with me. I certainly agree with you in that we
  should not see this as a unilateral United Kingdom versus Zimbabwe issue. 
  What I do believe is that we should see it as a world issue for taking action. 
  You said at the beginning of your evidence that you were reluctant to take
  about the UN role in this.  Notwithstanding that reluctance, can I press you
  to say why you are reluctant to? Is there not a role for the UN to take
  action?
        (Mr Hain)   There may well be. I am not reluctant to discuss the UN, in
  fact I said it had been discussed in New York.  There is a progression to
  these matters. If an African solution can be found to this African problem
  that would be the best solution.
        63.      What suggestions have we put to the United Nations about action
  that the United Nations could take?
        (Mr Hain)   I do not want to go into detailed discussion about what we
  are saying through private diplomacy. What we need to achieve is a successful
  resolution of this crisis?
        64.      Have you or have you not proposed to the United Nations that they
  should take some action?
        (Mr Hain)   At this stage we have concentrated on doing what I have
  described, which is approaching the Commonwealth, which is approaching the
  organisation for African unity, neighbouring African States and one of the
  most powerful African leaders, President Slavasinger.  That has been our
  priority.  The question of the United Nations involvement may well come at a
  later stage.  What we are interested in is effective action, not gestures.
        65.      With respect, that is not answering the question that I asked. 
  The question that I asked was, "Has the British Government put any proposals
  to the United Nations for them to take action?"
        (Mr Hain)   No, we have not asked the United Nations to take action.  We
  have had discussions with our colleagues in the United Nations.  If you are
  interested in serious diplomacy as opposed to gestures these things have to
  be approached in a measured and a progressive fashion.
        66.      Can I ask you what contact you have had with the various
  international financial bodies with a view to suggesting that they take
  action?
        (Mr Hain)   Effectively President Mugabe has imposed negative sanctions
  on himself by the inability of the International Monetary Fund and the World
  Bank to actually support Zimbabwe in the way that, other things being equal,
  and the different policies we would all like them to do.  We have not needed
  to talk to the IMF or any other international financial institution about
  action against Zimbabwe because Zimbabwe has prevented itself from receiving
  support from us.
        67.      Whilst that is true it must be blindingly obvious to everybody
  concerned that if there is to be a solution to the problems in Zimbabwe at
  some stage it will require the involvement of the IMF and others. Therefore,
  would it not be sensible to encourage world financial institutions to make it
  crystal clear that they too will require change before they are prepared to
  join in any sort of discussion?
        (Mr Hain)   With due respect, Mr Wilshire, that is exactly what I said. 
  The IFIs have not been able to agree a programme of support they want to
  provide because the Government of Zimbabwe has been unable to change its
  policies.  There have been calls, not from this Committee, I am pleased to
  say, for sanctions and other tough action of the kind that Mr Wilshire is
  alluding to.  It is very significant that the leader of the opposition Morgan
  Tsvangirai has explicitly said he does not want sanctions.  He does not want
  these kind of instant gestures which may seem as if Britain is taking some
  action but could well have a totally counter-productive effect, not least, on
  the people in Zimbabwe who are suffering terribly, as they are at the present
  time.  If the Opposition takes that view I think we should all take heed of
  it.
        68.      You said in reply to my colleague, Sir David Madel, about the
  Commonwealth, if I understood you correctly, that if a country becomes a
  military dictatorship Commonwealth rules allow for its suspension, expulsion
  or whatever else it may decide. Did I hear you correctly when you said that
  there are no rules within the Commonwealth institutions that allow us to take
  action again human rights abuses.  Is that what you were saying?
        (Mr Hain)   What I said was that the remit of the Commonwealth
  Ministerial Action Group, which is the only body to act for the Commonwealth
  in between heads of government conferences - the last one was in Durban last
  November - only enable action to be taken in the terms of suspension.  Gambia,
  for example, is still on the agenda of the CMAG.  Cameroon was discussed at
  the meeting of CMAG in New York and Zimbabwe will be discussed, because
  Britain asked that it be so, at the next meeting.  Can I also just briefly
  add, I was at a meeting of CMAG, the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group,
  and one of the leading voices on behalf of the British Government in early
  October that urged a widening of the remit of CMAG precisely to address the
  wider issues raised by the Harare declaration in terms of human rights abuses,
  bad governance and so on.  That was agreed by CMAG but it was put off at the
  Durban CHOGM meeting for consideration by a high level group, which is chaired
  by South Africa and has to report back to the next Commonwealth heads of
  government meeting.
        69.      The Commonwealth can suspend Zimbabwe if it chooses to?
        (Lord MacDonald)           No. Not unless there is a military coup.
  
                               Chairman
        70.      The precedence are for a military coup. There is no precedence
  for any human rights matters being the basis for suspension?
        (Mr Hain)   There is a precedent for them being addressed, as I have said
  in respect of the Gambia and Cameroon, but there is not a precedent for
  suspension. The rules do not permit it.
  
                              Mr Wilshire
        71.      Can I be clear on that, is it precedent for it or is the Minister
  saying that the rules technically do not allow it.  I think that is a very
  important distinction.
        (Mr Hain)   Unless there was a consensus amongst the heads of government
  of the Commonwealth - they do not have to formally meet - that action could
  be taken.
  
                               Chairman
        72.      There is no chance of African colleagues agreeing to such a
  suspension in the case of Zimbabwe?
        (Mr Hain)   No, I do not think there is, that is the plain statement of
  fact.
        Chairman:   I would like to move on to citizenship.  Mr Mackinlay. 
  
                             Mr Mackinlay
        73.      I would like to ask you about a very narrow area, Minister,
  arithmetically mainly, presumably the people who live in Zimbabwe, to whom we
  owe obligations, there is like a ranking order, there are people who are
  demonstrably British citizens. I guess, perhaps you might amplify on that,
  there might be some who are Zimbabwean citizens but have relinquished United
  Kingdom citizenship, and then there might be others.  I wonder if you can give
  us some amplification on what you see as the numbers, bearing in mind, I
  think, even emanating from British Government circles there is a bit of
  ambiguity. There is talk about 20,000 British nationals and then we have also
  heard the figure 15,000. We have obligations to everyone in terms of human
  justice and for humanitarian reasons, I accept that. There must be a ranking
  order for priority?
        (Mr Hain)   I am happy to the clarify the situation.
  
                               Chairman
        74.      Please.
        (Mr Hain)   I think the Foreign Affairs Committee received in confidence
  a document describing some of these matters.  As of the end of last week there
  were 14,500 registered British nationals, but this figure is constantly being
  updated.  Overwhelmingly these are Zimbabwean citizens who can, however, claim
  British passports and register as British nationals either directly themselves
  or through their parents or grandparents.
        75.      Would have unrestricted right of access to the United Kingdom?
        (Mr Hain)   If you are a British passport holder that is clearly the
  case.
  
                             Mr Mackinlay
        76.      Do you think there is also a group amongst the Africans, and
  there is probably a small minority of Asian people there, who are equally
  entitled but it probably has not been activated or they are unaware of their
  rights on a comparable basis to the last group you referred to?
        (Mr Hain)   I would not want to speculate or guess on what the total is. 
  I am trying to be as helpful as I can be.  Not all of the 14,500 registered
  British nationals that I referred to are white.
        77.      No.
        (Mr Hain)   I do not think we should see this as a white/black issue.  In
  fact some of the media coverage has focused too much on this recently.  More
  black citizens have been killed as a result of this lawlessness than whites.
        78.      I agree with you.  You probably missed my point, it seems to me
  that the group you referred to, which people who are Zimbabwean citizens , who
  have a right to a British passport from the point of view of London, you say
  that is rising 14,500, many of them are not white, many are African, and so
  on, I wonder if that could grow considerably?  There must be some assessment
  of what the maximum number would be, is there not?
        (Mr Hain)   I do want to---
        79.      We must have these records back from pre-1981?
        (Mr Hain)   We think there is up to 20,000 people in Zimbabwe who may
  qualify.  We cannot be exactly sure. This is an issue that goes back
  generations.  This enables me to briefly make this point, these are people who
  want to stay in Zimbabwe, they want to continue to farm the land, to
  contribute to the country.  It is their country, Britain is not their country. 
  I think it is important we keep a focus on that.  All of our diplomacy and all
  of the, I hope, pronouncements and statements of this Committee ultimately
  will bear in mind that it is in the interests of those people to stay in
  Zimbabwe and contribute to its future.
  
                               Chairman
        80.      It is the interests of Zimbabwe to have their skills.
        (Mr Hain)   It is very much in the interests of Zimbabwe to have their
  skills.  One of the most disturbing and saddening features of the current farm
  invasions is that those skills are not being able to be deployed, as a result
  of which the country is being hurt.
  
                              Mr Rowlands
        81.      May I seek clarification on these numbers, 14,500 are registered
  as British nationals with the High Commission and therefore either have
  British passports or would be issued with them on request; that is right?
        (Mr Hain)   That is right.
        82.      You think there may be another 5,500 who may qualify as well, if
  you talk about the figure of 20,000?
        (Mr Hain)   Yes, that is our best estimate.
        83.      British citizenship is very clearly and narrowly defined?
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed.  You cannot be certain until an individual presents
  him or herself at the High Commission and that can be established.
        84.      Of those 14,500 who registered how many are farmers as opposed
  to people who lived in what was Rhodesia, and now Zimbabwe, retired
  pensioners, ex-public service workers and others, who may not be directly
  effected by the present conflict?
        (Mr Hain)   I do not have figures on that.  I am happy to establish those
  figures, if I am able to, and provide them to the Committee in writing.
        85.      It would important to clarify, would it not, between those who
  by the terrible circumstances of the last few weeks may be forced to leave as
  opposed to those who may feel they are forced because they lived not as
  farmers but as citizens in Zimbabwe.
        (Mr Hain)   Yes, indeed.  Although I respect your focus on this problem,
  because it could ultimately be an issue for Britain, I want to stress that
  everything that is said or done at the present time must concentrate on the
  rights of those people to stay in Zimbabwe, as they wish to do.
        86.      One further clarification on the issue of citizenship, is it the
  case that any Commonwealth citizen who has a parent born in the United Kingdom
  has the right to a vote in the United Kingdom?
        (Mr Hain)   The detail of those matters is a matter obviously for the
  Home Office.  Can I make one other point, I will happily return to it, if you
  wish, in some cases many of these individuals will go to other countries. 
  Some have already gone to South Africa, some of their children have gone to
  the South Africa. Australia, New Zealand and Canada are also countries that
  they tend to move to.  I do not think you should anticipate what may happen.
        87.      You have repeatedly said throughout your evidence this morning
  that you wanted a measured response.  You also, I think, put a lot of
  emphasise on this forthcoming delegation.  Do you have any reason to believe
  that this forthcoming delegation will have any sense of authority and will
  have to come to any understanding about these issues?  We have been trying all
  morning to discover whether there is any influences on President Mugabe to
  alter the main policy. You described you tried to utilise the President of
  Nigeria, neighbouring states, the Commonwealth and OANU.  If this delegation
  in coming do you have any reason to believe it will come with any sense of
  authority or come to any kind of understanding that could actually bring the
  immediate crisis to an end if there is some sort of understanding reached
  between yourselves and this delegation?
        (Mr Hain)   At a time when people are being killed and many are being
  beaten up and violence and lawlessness is taking place it is the duty of
  British ministers to explore every option and to look for and hope for success
  rather than anticipate failure.  I hope it will be possible for our
  discussions with that delegation to be productive.  I hope that the influences
  being brought to bear on Zimbabwe in the region, through the Commonwealth,
  through the organisation for African unity and quite possibly in the end
  through the United Nations will also be productive.  I think it is our duty
  to explore every opportunity that we have.
        88.      Nobody is denying that.  You raised a lot of hope and you placed
  considerable emphasise on the importance of this delegation, I wonder how much
  hope we should take from it?  This delegation is coming, it has been coming
  for weeks and during this "coming for weeks" there has been violence, there
  has been murder and there has been burning.
        (Mr Hain)   We have been informed by the High Commission that the Foreign
  Minister Dr Mudenge will be leading the delegation.   Mr Nkomo will be also
  be on it, the Minister for Local Government and National Housing and Dr
  Shamuyaria, the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Those are fairly senior
  ministers.  Obviously we hope they will have the authority to, as I same sure
  they will, to talk to us.
        89.      May I suggest we indicate that this delegation should come as
  speedily as possible now?
        (Mr Hain)   We do want it to come as speedily as possible.  The Foreign
  Secretary is in India at the present time and we are hoping a convenient time
  can be made as soon as possible, hopefully next week.
        90.      You rightly rejected the concept of sanctions of the kind that
  have been suggested.  There is, indeed, one area where we should indicate very
  clearly that at this moment in time we have no intention of continuing with
  any form of arms licensing to Zimbabwe.  I know we will have an opportunity
  to cross-examine you in much closer detail within the next fortnight or so on
  arms licensing policy, however can I seek clarification from you that there
  are no standard licences being issued?  They were issued in February, after
  the statement about tightening up.  Could you, please, just clarify the
  position of the Government towards any Hawks spares at this moment in time?
        (Mr Hain)   The Hawk spares, as I understand it, have been used for a
  couple of Hawk aircrafts, which are serviceable in the Congo, the Hawk spares
  have gone out.  We have had no request for new Hawk spares and I think that
  if there were to be any exports or application for them they would be very
  seriously considered in light of the current situation and, of course, in the
  light of the Congo war.  Zimbabwe's intervention in the Congo is reportedly
  costing the country $1 million a day and is bleeding its budget dry.  We have
  a very clear policy, which will apply to Zimbabwe as to other countries,
  particularly in the current delicate situation with the crisis in Zimbabwe,
  that we will not supply any arms which could be used for either external
  aggression or internal repression.
        91.      Those Hawk spares went to Hawks that are flying in the Congo?
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed. 
        92.      That conflicted with the criteria.
        (Mr Hain)   That was in honour of an existing contract for planes that
  were supplied by the previous Government in the early 1980s and the early
  1990s.  The present situation in Zimbabwe and obviously the crisis in Zimbabwe
  will have to be taken into account in any fresh consideration.  There are none
  that I am aware of that are coming in at the moment in terms of an export
  licence application.
  
                              Mr Chidgey
        93.      Just to reinforce the last point, if I can, is it not the case,
  Minister, that the Government's decision on 24th February to grant those seven
  Standard Individual Export Licences for the export of Hawk spares does that
  not conflict with the Prime Minister's claim, made over a month ago, that the
  Government was tightening up its policy on the export licences for the
  countries intervening in the conflict in the DRC?
        (Mr Hain)   I do not think so.  I think it was about a few spares for
  Hawk aircrafts.  We do not know whether the spares were actually used for the
  two planes in the Congo.  I do not think that conflicts at all with a very
  clear statement about what will be the policy in the future in this respect.
        94.      We talked about the policy that was set out by the Prime Minister
  and it seems to me that decisions taken subsequent to that were against what
  the Prime Minister told us the policy was.  What we do in the future is
  another issue.  I think it is important to recognise that we did not get it
  right in this one so we can get it right in the future.
        (Mr Hain)   You will beware that the Prime Minister actually made the
  announcements on both occasions, so that is where it rests.
  
                               Dr Godman
        95.      You mentioned holding discussions with opposition politicians,
  for example Morgan Tsvangirai who leads what might be described as a
  heterogenous opposition, brought together only in regard to its opposition to
  the ZANU/PF and President Mugabe.  What about cabinet colleagues of Mr Mugabe? 
  What about Eddison Zvobgo, is it not the case that he is attempting to
  revitalise Zambea and that he might be amenable to discussing in a
  constructive way a socially just land reform and radical changes in the
  ownership and the tenure of the land?
        (Mr Hain)   I appreciate your questions, Dr Godman, but I do not want to
  speculate on the individual members of the ZANU/PF party, however high they
  are, but there is considerable descent within ZANU/PF, which is unusual given
  its history. I know there are progressive voices who well understand what
  needs to be done, who do not agree with the present policy of the President
  and Government and who would wish to see a much more constructive approach.
        96.      I do not want to ask you difficult questions. 
        (Mr Hain)   That is your job, is not it?
        97.      Well, questions that might cause you embarrassment in your
  continuing discussions.  Is it not the case that President Zobu and his
  colleagues are pretty close to Cyril Ramaphosa of the ANC and could not a
  combination of such individuals, such as Mr Zobu and Mr Ramaphosa play an
  influential mediating constraining role in combination where the President and
  his supporters are concerned.
        (Mr Hain)   I think it is important that all good friends of Zimbabwe
  come to its aid at the present time, as we are attempting to do.  I respect
  your question and your knowledge of the situation.  I do not deny your right
  to ask it in a helpful way but I do not want to speculate on individual
  members of the party.
        98.      Let us talk about parties, the ANC has been fairly subdued in
  terms of, if you like, intervening in a constructive way in Zimbabwe, is that
  not the case?
        (Mr Hain)   The ANC has enjoyed close relations with the ruling party. 
  Can I say too that many ZANU/PF MPs are actually now standing as independents. 
  Some ministers find themselves in a situation where they are not being
  automatically chosen any more, so there is obviously a change on the way.  
        99.      The South African Government, the President and prominent members
  of the ANC could play a very helpful role in helping to sort things out?
        (Mr Hain)   I assume that is why President Mbeki is due to visit Harare
  soon.
  
                               Chairman
        100.     Escom is supplying electricity at a great loss to Zimbabwe.
        (Mr Hain)   Indeed.  I met the Chairman of Escom?) only yesterday and he
  was very exercised about this.  I think Mozambique is in a similar
  predicament.  Can I stress too, particularly in response to Dr Godman's
  constructive points, that the Southern Africa Development Community - whose
  Chairman is President Chissano, with whom the Foreign Secretary has discussed
  this matter, as I have with the Mozambique Foreign Minister, Leonardo Simao
  -are equally concerned.  I think that SADC clearly has a role to play their.
  
                               Dr Godman
        101.     With regard to World Bank's structural adjustment programme,
  it did not work too well in Zambia and it is important we do not have that
  kind of clumsy international intervention in Zimbabwe, would you agree?
        (Mr Hain)   I very much agree.  I think lessons have been learned from
  the Zambian experience. 
        102.     The World Bank in future will not be as clumsy as it was in
  Zambia.
        (Mr Hain)   I hope that the World Bank is never clumsy.
        Dr Godman:  Very clumsy.
  
                            Sir Peter Emery
        103.      I do not think we can hold you responsible for the World
  Bank.  May I clear up two points, there has been a number of questions about
  land resettlement.  I think it would be useful to get on record that the
  British Government has, since independence, actually paid a considerable
  amount of money to Zimbabwe for land resettlement schemes.  Can you tell the
  Committee how much?
        (Mr Hain)   œ44 million.  Most of it in the 1980s.
        104.      We have made a major contribution.
        (Mr Hain)   Sir Peter, I agree.  It not as if we have done nothing and it
  is not as if we do not want to do anything. It is the misguided policies which
  have blocked not just us but now the Americans and others from contributing
  to the solution to this matter.
        105.      I wanted to get it on record because some people tried to
  suggest we have done nothing but that is not the case.
        (Mr Hain)   I am grateful.
        106.      I return, again, to the questions that I put to you. You did
  say that we should explore every opportunity to influence Mugabe.  I think we
  have all agreed that the opportunity is greatest coming from Africans.  One
  of the leading Africans is Kofi Annan from Ghana, respected throughout the
  world - we have been to many other areas Kosovo, Russia and all of these
  things - I would have thought he was eminently suitable to try and bring
  influence on Mugabe, who has particular relationships with Ghana. His first
  wife was Ghanaian and he worked in Ghana. Therefore there is a relationship. 
  Surely we ought to be pressing Kofi Annan and the United Nations to look at
  every opportunity to influence this man. I am surprised that you have been
  reticent, or it appears the Government has been reticent, to bring that about
  immediately.
        (Mr Hain)   We are not reticent, Sir Peter, we are just concerned that
  our international diplomacy on this matter is a consistent and a progressive
  one.  I am sure Kofi Annan is deeply concerned about this situation.  I am not
  trying to be defensive or reticent, I am simply trying to signal that these
  matter are best pursued through private diplomacy.
        107.      Yes.
        (Mr Hain)   It may be frustrating but then---
        108.      I do not wish to complicate the situation but if you are
  trying to tell me that, perhaps, my wishes are being complied with privately,
  is that what you are suggesting?
        (Mr Hain)   I am not trying to tell you anything.  I know are you trying
  to ask me.
  
                            Sir David Madel
        109.     Is your private diplomacy energetic?
        (Mr Hain)   It is extremely energetic, particularly that of the Foreign
  Secretary. Even in the last few days while he has been in India he has been
  constantly on the telephone to pursue international diplomacy.
  
                               Chairman
        110.     One final point about the elections, hopefully free and fair. 
  We understand from you this morning that the speaker of the Zimbabwean
  Parliament has said they would welcome election monitors. Are we, as a
  Government, ready to respond positively if there were such opportunities?
        (Mr Hain)   Yes, indeed, we clearly are.  This is the absolute priority
  at the present time. When you have had one hundred members of the Opposition
  attacked and some ten killed in the last few weeks this is a very, very
  serious situation.  I think this is probably the most critical time in
  Zimbabwe's short history, arguably even in the whole of the country's history,
  even when it was under the label of Rhodesia, and it is vital that these
  elections are pretty fair.
        111.     Can I thank you and your colleague very much.  Alas, we have
  heard further evidence of the tragedy of Zimbabwe today.  It is a friendly
  country, a country in decay and it has been a helpful dialogue between the
  Committee and yourselves today.
        (Mr Hain)   I am very grateful for your interest, Mr Chairman.