TNAG-0596-FCO40-743-Policy-of-HM-Government-towards-remaining-Dependent-Territor-1977 — Page 23

adopted by all parties in Parliament that the Government is

normally guided in such matters by the will of the people of the

territory as a whole. Tuvalu and the "precedents" mentioned

by the Hon Member are in fact good examples of the application of

this policy since in each case the separation was made with the

specific approval of the elected government of the territory as a

whole.

4.

Mr Posnett was wrong in saying that the "15 Points" offered by the Gilberts Government were rejected by the Banabans out of hand without study by the Council.

Answer: It is correct that The "15 Points" offer was replied to

on behalf of the Banaban Council by Reverend Tebuke Rotan in a letter

which rejected them all. Mr Posnett's Report sought simply to record

first the views put to him by the Government of the Gilbert Islands (at page 15 under the heading "the view from the Gilberts"). These

did not purport to represent his own views. Second, he reports (at page 25) the response of the Banaban Council when he raised this

matter with them. Third, he records his own clear impression after

staying four days on Rabi Island with the Banabans, that the details

of the 15-Point Offer had not been studied by the Council or by the

people. I do not think the letter mentioned by the Hon Member

necessarily conflicts with what Mr Posnett says.

Happily, however

I am hopeful in the light of the discussions which, following his

interview with my Rt Hon Friend, Reverend Tebuke is now having with Mr. Posnett, that more constructive developments may be possible.

now

5.

Mr Posnett describes the Banaban demand for sovereignty as irrational and their case in support of their claim as irrelevant.

What Mr Posnett said was that the Banaban feelings on

Answer:

2

<

/the issue