§ 2.37 p.m.
§ Lord AveburyMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what measures they have taken to discourage cricketers from playing or coaching in South Africa.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Bellwin)My Lords, no direct action has been taken concerning individual cricketers; leaving aside the matter of desirability it would be impracticable to try to do so. But the Cricket Council is fully acquainted with the terms of the Commonwealth Statement of 1977.
§ Lord AveburyMy Lords, but does not the Gleneagles Agreement require Commonwealth Governments to take every practicable step to discourage contact or competition by their nationals with sporting organisations, teams or sportsmen from South Africa? While, of course, the Government have no legal power to stop cricketers from playing or coaching in South Africa, may I ask whether they ought not to issue statements calling on cricketers not to support apartheid in this way just as various Ministers, including the Prime Minister, called on individual athletes not to take part in the Olympic Games in Moscow?
§ Lord BellwinMy Lords, the fact is that our citizens are free to come and go as they please, without reference to Government. But, in any case, it is impracticable because there is no requirement for such individuals to notify the Government of their intentions to travel to South Africa or anywhere else come to that.
§ Lord AveburyMy Lords, while I quite accept—and I said so—that our citizens are free to come and go as they please, may I ask why the Prime Minister considered it quite proper to say that British athletes have the same rights and the same responsibilities towards freedom and its maintenance as every citizen of the United Kingdom in respect of the visits by athletes to Moscow, when she does not feel inclined to say the same thing about cricketers who go and support apartheid by playing cricket in South Africa?
§ Lord BellwinMy Lords, if she so wishes, the Prime Minister will make such statements as she thinks are appropriate in this matter, as indeed in any other matter.
Lord Paget of NorthamptonMy Lords, could it possibly be because South Africa is not engaged in invading a neutral country and because, indeed, South Africa provides far more freedom than ever Russia does?
§ Lord BellwinMy Lords, I note carefully what the noble Lord has said.
§ Lord Elwyn-JonesMy Lords, does the Minister's earlier answer indicate that no Minister would dare utter a statement in disagreement with the Prime Minister?
§ Lord BellwinNot at all, my Lords; there have been such things said, not very frequently, but sometimes.
§ Lord AveburyMy Lords, does the Minister think—whether or not he is prepared to answer in this House—that Ministers including the Prime Minister had better have some better replies ready for President Shagari of Nigeria who arrives tomorrow and who, possibly, has orders worth £1,500 million per annum for British industry? Whether or not the Minister thinks that there are any moral considerations here, are there not certain practical ones that we should bear in mind?
§ Lord BellwinNo, my Lords; any comment that I would make on that would not be helpful.
§ Lord DerwentMy Lords, would it be a good idea if Her Majesty's Government arranged a meeting between the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, and the professional cricketers so that they could inform him as to what their views are of his views?
§ Lord BellwinMy Lords, I am sure that that is something that the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, himself would have to take up if he so wished.
§ Lord AveburyMy Lords, I am not a Minister yet!