LORDS DEBATE CYPRUS

Press, Volume XCIII, Issue 27920, 17 March 1956, Page 9

LORDS DEBATE CYPRUS

Dr. Fisher’s Plan For Settlement (N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 11 p.m.) LONDON, March 16. A three-point peace plan for Cyprus, submitted by the Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. G. F. Fisher) was given a lukewarm reception by a Government spokesman in the House of Lords last night, the “Daily Telegraph” reported today. Dr. Fisher proposed: That a new constitution for the island should be drawn up. That the Greek and Turkish Governments should then join with Britain in an appeal to end terrorism. That as soon as order was restored, Archbishop Makarios should return from exile to resume negotiations. The Earl of Munster, Minister without portfolio, said he could give no assurance that Archbishop Makarios would be allowed to return to Cyprus, even if violence ended. A new constitution needed co-operation and just now it was clear there would be none, the Minister added. Dr. Fisher said the arrest and removal of Archbishop Makarios, head of one of the historic churches of the world, had been received in Britain and elsewhere with great perplexity and distress. Th& Government must recognise that whatever his political activities, Archbishop Makarios remained head of an independent church and a religious and Christian leader whose presence was indispensable for the proper functioning of that church. “No Possibility” Lord Munster said he would communicate Dr. Fisher’s proposals- to the Colonial Secretary. “I am bound to admit that I see no possibility whatever in meeting the Primate's request,” he added. Dr, Fisher intervened to ask amid cheers: “Would you suggest some other way of getting the reconciliation process under way?” Lord Munster replied: “We have not at all slammed the door. We have our hopes that through the restoration of law and order others may come forward to form a new and liberal constitution. “I think we may well see other people coming forward, who up to date, through fear and terrorism, were not prepared to co-operate with the Governor or Government.” From first to last, Archbishop Makarios’s motives were shrouded — until they were uncovered—in a haze of the grossest insincerity in all his dealings, said Lord Munster. “We have no craving for revenge,” he added. Dr. Fisher said Archbishop Makarios had written to him after he (Dr. Fisher) had asked him not to condone the Cyprus outrages. Dr. Fisher said Archbishop Makarios replied: “I am afraid that an official condemnation of events by myself would not find at the present stage the necessary response, but would involve the risk of exposing me rather unprofitably.” Dr. Fisher added: “I fear he spoke then, not as a churchman to uphold a religious principle, but as a politician calculating risks and chances and ready to allow an evil, which he regretted in private, but would not publicly condemn.” Views of Earl Attlee Earl Attlee, who was making his first speech in the House of Lords, said he did not think the deportation of Archbishop Makarios was wise.

“It ds never wise to remove the ruler of a Nationalist movement,” he said. “When you have deported him, what do you do next? More often than not you have eventually to bring back the deportee.” Earl Attlee said that the United States was “a little apt to stand on the sidelines and leave us to carry on the fight. I think we want to get an understanding with the United States.”