SIR GILBERT PARKERI beg to ask the Prime Minister in view of the fact that opportunity has been given to the House of Commons to discuss the policy of the Government on all the main questions to be dealt with in the Letters Patent granting responsible government to the Transvaal, except in relation to land settlement, whether the Government will make a statement of policy on this question before the Letters Patent are issued and give facilities for discussion at the same time; and whether he will ask the Member for Wolverhampton to remove from the Order Paper the Motion standing in his name calling attention to land settlement.
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANThe hon. Member has called my attention to a notice of Motion standing in the name of my hon. friend the Member for Wolverhampton with reference to land settlement in South Africa. That Motion I would point out to my hon. friend is wholly unnecessary in view of the fact that there will be a full explanation of policy and opportunity for discussion when the Letters Patent are explained to the House. If this should fail—and I do not see how such a thing could happen— to afford the necessary opportunity we should be prepared to give the latter part of some day's sitting for this discussion.
§ MR. LYTTELTON (St. George's, Hanover Square)What is the reason for this pointed exception being made in the case of the land settlement question in which all Members on both sides are interested? Why are we not to have a full explanation of the policy of the Government before the Letters Patent are issued?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANNo exception has been made in this case.
§ MR. LYTTELTONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a statement was made last August by the Under-Secretary for the Colonies that all important matters relating to this constitutional question would be discussed, but omission was made with regard to any explanation 1252 of land settlement? What is the reason for this omission, and will an opportunity be given to discuss the question before the Letters Patent become final?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid there was no omission unless it were accidental, and the statement to be made would not only embrace all details of the constitution of the Transvaal, but sketch generally the whole constitution of the Orange River Colony, and include the question in which the right hon. Gentleman was interested.
§ MR. LYTTELTONIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware that when once the Letters Patent are issued the thing is irrevocable and it will be too late to discuss it? Has the right hon. Gentle-man determined to withdraw this important question from discussion by the House?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI have already said the House will have full opportunity of discussing the matter.
SIR GILBERT PARKERWere we not led to believe by what was said in another place that the Government would make a full statement to the House before the Letters Patent were issued?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANIt would be extremely inconvenient to discuss the Letters Patent before they are in the hands of Members. I am under the impression that this was the course pursued by the right hon. Gentleman himself when he produced his constitution just after the House rose. I may be wrong; at any rate, we had no opportunity of discussing his new constitution for the Transvaal. I do not mention this as any matter of recrimination, but only to show that there is no harm done in this case, where there has been a full statement of the general lines of the new constitution. The Government prefer that when the House comes to discuss it it shall have the actual terms of the constitution before it.
§ * MR. ASHLEYasked if anything would be done to obviate the scandal of a single Member preventing discussion of 1253 any Question, however, urgent by putting a Motion on the Paper.
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANWe are familiar with that scandal.