Special Hearings — Business Hearings — 1997-11-12

LORD HUGHES: I thank you very much, Chair.  I appreciate the opportunity to have submitted written presentation from the Anti-Apartheid Archives Committee and the chance to give (indistinct) and indeed to ask questions.
 Can I say, the Anti-Apartheid Movement always believed and understood that the liberation of the people of South Africa and the ending of the Apartheid system would be achieved by the liberation movements and the resistance of the people inside the country.
 Nevertheless we believed that external international actions and solidarity were important and indeed significant and I think our analysis proved to be correct.
 We believed the Apartheid system was evil and immoral in every aspect of life.  We also took to view was that Apartheid was an economic one;  that the exploitation, super-exploitation was integral with legal, in quotation marks, or institutionalised Apartheid.
 We therefor believed that the South African business trade and commerce sustained the system.  We also believed that international business trade and commerce played an important and significant role in sustaining Apartheid.
 The Anti-Apartheid Movement sought in all its campaigns to influence government (indistinct) action and to try to make sure that there was less investment at least in South Africa, but I'm going to say that most business and government was hostile to that point of view.
 The defense of investment in South Africa and the hostility to the application of sanctions fell into three broad categories.
 First of all sanctions wouldn't work.  They would have no effect on the Apartheid Government which was entrenched in its views and the external pressure would simply mean that the Government would act even oppressively.
 Secondly, it was argued that sanctions would help the people most they intended to help, since any reduction in the size of economy in South Africa, would lead to lower living standards of the Black population and massive increase in unemployment.
 There was some vigorous protagonist of the view that investment was actually beneficial to the ending of Apartheid.  The most notable being Mrs Margaret Thatcher of the Conservative Prime Minister, who argued that the (indistinct) effect of the booming of South African economy would lead to the emergence of a Black middle class and that somehow the Apartheid regime would wither away. 
 I think anyone who believes that is naive to believe that if you feed a lion more and more meat that one day it turns into a vegetarian.
 The policy of separate, but equal development, were shown to be a sham and discredited.  The propaganda that the South African population was docile and contend with the system and that internal opposition came from a (indistinct) contents stubbed up by foreign communist agitators, were shown to be untenable.
 It is astonishing to be known that once negotiations commenced it reached a successful conclusion with the election.  How many groups of politicians and those involved in trade and commerce, now say they were always in the (indistinct) and actively working against Apartheid.  We reckon otherwise.
 In our presentation paper, which I shall quickly summarise, because I know we're running in time;  we deal with the Anti-Apartheid Movement.  We deal with how British business profited from the Apartheid system.  How they maintained low wages and how the Apartheid system was a system of forced labour and that the business exploited the South African Government and the South African Government exploited business.
 We deal with the building of the military state and how British arms companies build up the Apartheid arms machine.  How the oil embargo was seconded by five main oil companies who controlled 85 percent of the petroleum production in South Africa.
 We deal with the developing of a nuclear capacity.  You recall President De Klerk admitted that South Africa had a nuclear weapon's capacity.  It's quite clear from the evidence we present the South Africa which had the second largest uranium resources in the world, was well suited the develop the nuclear capability, but in fact that it could not have done so without the technological transfer from multi-national co-operations.
 The company set up, all sort of lobbing organisations from South Africa ...(tape ends)

LORD HUGHES: ... the national business gave to the Apartheid system was to bankroll it.  So we point out in our submission how when South Africa was in very serious economic crisis, the Government had to turn to the international banks to support it.
 Certainly after 1976 after the Soweto uprising there was a reluctance on foreign companies, international banks to lend, but after South Africa put into practice the IFM's deflationary prescription the lending began again.  Led by the Swiss (indistinct) company, Credit Swiss, German Deutsche Bank, Dressner Bank, UF City Bank, Chase-Manhattan;  I can go on with a whole list of people who lend millions and billions of money to the Apartheid regime.
 Eventually the international banking companies believed that the Apartheid system was collapsing economically and they then refused to rule over debts.  I think that it's quite clear, looking in retrospect, to see that the most serious charge which can be made against Western business involvement, was that the economic state created made it impossible for Governments, even Governments whose members was sincerely opposed to Apartheid, to take any real action against Apartheid.
 International business began to withdraw.  Only when the combination of the struggle within South Africa and the strength of public opinion outside made it unprofitable for it to continue.
 The speed with which the Apartheid (indistinct) then crumbled forced the regime to come to the negotiating table, which I believe was the final proof if any were needed of the way in which international business sustained Apartheid.
 In addition to the submission which we have let you have, I brought with me a fairly large number of the Suez documents which I'll be happy to leave you so that you can check your sources for yourself.
 Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Lord Hughes, I must congratulate you for the most disciplined submission so far and you know, despite the fact that you've come - Mr Minty, please, will you continue?