He also found that there was criticism of the present constitutional arrangements, in particular of the blocking power given to the white minority over a wide range of legislation, and of the character of the Public Service and other Commissions. In the period of consultations, we made it clear that we would attach particular importance to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting at Lusaka. At Lusaka the British Prime Minister said that the British Government were wholly committed to genuine majority rule in Rhodesia. The principle of majority rule has been accepted by all the delegates at this Conference. The Prime Minister, at Lusaka, also recognised the importance of encouraging the European minority to remain as an integral part of the community. The Prime Minister emphasised that Britain fully accepted its constitutional responsibility to bring Rhodesia to legal independence on a basis of justice and democracy, comparable with the arrangements we have made for the independence of other countries. The British Government took action immediately to give effect to the Lusaka declaration by convening this Conference and by putting forward constitutional proposals in accordance with the principles which were agreed at Lusaka and which have formed the basis for other independence constitutions in Africa and elsewhere. The constitution is the fundamental problem to which we must address ourselves. I am of course well aware that there are other aspects of a settlement which must in due course be resolved. But it is essential to the prospects of success that we should first seek agreement on our destination - which is the independence constitution. If that can be achieved it will be necessary to decide the arrangements to give effect to that agreement. The British Government has stated clearly that it will be prepared to accept its full share of the responsibility for the practical implementation of those arrangements. The central element will be free and fair elections, properly supervised under British Government authority. The British Government's outline proposals for an independence constitution have been before you for four weeks. I did not suggest that this Conference should be held on the basis of prior acceptance of this document. Instead, I would like to take the document as the starting point for our discussions. The British Government have been asked to put forward proposals and we have done so. Unless there is a focus for our discussion it will be impossible to make progress. There are certain general points which I would make in introducing them. First, as the constitutional authority for Southern Rhodesia, the United Kingdom intends to take direct responsibility for the independence constitution. What you have before you are the British Government's proposals, taking account of the points made to us in our consultations. They are intended to give effect to the principles which have been accepted by successive British Governments as the proper basis for independence, and you will recollect them very clearly. They are that the principle of majority rule must be maintained and guaranteed; that there must be guarantees against retrogressive amendments to the constitution; that there should be immediate improvement in the political status of the African population; that racial discrimination is unacceptable; that we must ensure that, regardless of race, there is no oppression of majority by minority or of minority by majority; and that what is agreed must be shown to be acceptable to the people of Rhodesia. Second, our proposals are comparable to the basis on which the United Kingdom has granted independence to other former dependent territories, in particular those in Africa. We have no doubt, therefore, that a solution on this basis will be accepted by the international community, as giving effect to the principles we have accepted in granting independence to other former dependent territories. In the case of Rhodesia, as in all other cases, a constitution must take account of special circumstances. But the broad lines of independence constitutions are clear enough; and in the precedents there are points which can help us towards a solution, for example on the representation of minorities. Third, we have made it unequivocally clear that our constitutional proposals represent in outline the kind of constitution on the basis of which the British Government would be prepared to grant legal independence. If agreement could be reached on alternative proposals which meet the British Government's criteria, we would be ready to grant independence on that basis. But we believe that the best hope of success lies in negotiation on the lines we have proposed, in accordance with the Commonwealth declaration.