HC Deb 25 February 1948 vol 447 cc2081-90

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Simmons.]

10.50 p.m.

Squadron-Leader Kinghorn (Great Yarmouth)

The title of the short debate I wish to initiate in this last half-hour is "The United States of Africa." First, I had better explain what I mean by that title. I do not mean that we should get all the various parts of Africa, put them under a common political headship, and then show them to the world as a United States of Africa. That is not my meaning at all. That is the political viewpoint, which in 1948 is far too reminiscent of 1848, and there are far more urgent things to be considered than political arrangements of that kind. The idea of naming it "United States of Africa" was to try to ventilate a new idea in this House through the unique opportunity which one has in the OFFICIAL REPORT, to show to the world that in Africa, under the leadership of this great nation of ours, there are possibilities far greater even that in the other United States of the world, namely the United States of America. I had better explain my interest before I proceed.

I am a great enthusiast for the development of the vast resources, in our territories in Africa. In the position in which we find ourselves in this country, and in the developments that are obviously going to take place in a matter of months from now, real salvation can be found, in my view, in the heart of our territories in Africa. Further, I am such an enthusiast that I have infected other people to the extent that one of my colleagues is now in Africa with a great plan of building which I hope he will bring to fruition. We shall show in our private capacities that this great development of African resources can really take place in our lifetime, and in the short run help us to overcome our present economic difficulties, and it the long run lead to a new orientation of our people in these vast spaces when our emigrants go from these islands. If we look at the map and see these various states, most of which are under our Colonial Office—territories like Kenya, Tanganyika, Northern Rhodesia, Nyasaland, and Bechuanaland, and that other great territory, Southern Rhodesia—it becomes obvious that, with the resources already developed, each one of them can bear comparison with their counterparts in the United States of America today.

For instance, in Southern Rhodesia there is every possibility of great development in the next few years and of places emerging like Pittsburg and Detroit in America. Then we have the scheme which was reported upon by Sir Miles Thomas. Further there is a cement factory which comes into production in Rhodesia this year and which will be embarked upon in a practical way. The dam across the Zambesi will give far more electricity to Central Africa than the great Boulder Dam in the U.S.A. The Boulder Dam, we must not forget, was opened in 1942. Many of these developments which have made the United States of America so economically rich have been opened up within the last ten years or so. The Boulder Dam, producing great hydroelectric power for Oregon, Washington, and other states—one of the greatest modern gestures of mankind—was finished and in production in 1942, three years after we entered the last war.

The same courage to build could be shown in Africa and a greater dam still could connect Northern and Southern Rhodesia across the Zambesi. We know the difficulty which faces our over-industrialised nation and that we can hardly feed a quarter of our population. We are fighting for dollars to obtain food and we are trying to secure the re-equipment of our industries, but have found nothing but difficulties. If we made a real review, as we ought, we might find we could make a real saving on matters such as rolling stock which, if it were sent to Northern and Southern Rhodesia, would be more valuable to African development than if it were used for bringing American passengers to Southampton. In the matter of housing, now that our housing schemes in 1948 have taken a definite turn, some people who were producing houses last year will not be doing so this year, and they might be able to provide homes for new dwellers in Africa.

There is no need for a special campaign to get people to go into these territories. They are only too willing to go, but many of those who could do the work necessary to develop the new territories cannot afford a passage—such people as bricklayers and engineers. There is already arising a social problem which may hold up the economic development of those territories, and therefore the Government must come in and provide the facilities for our people. The sooner they start, the better. This would lessen our population and the drain on our food resources over a long period. Arrangements must thus be made for a planned system of emigration.

Many of these ideas have been mooted before; there was one such campaign 100 years ago; but we have never been in such adverse straits as we are in at the moment, and never was there a more opportune time to spread our population and to see that they receive proper attention at the other end, as for instance, by satellite towns. I would like to see a proportion of our population, with complete firms from towns where certain trades are carried on, transferred there to carry on the same trades. The time is ripe for a great expansion to increase our national wealth and the wealth of all our Dominions and Colonial territories.

We have some great planners working behind the scenes and now and then we are given little bits of information about what they are doing. I would like to know if these great planners have taken into consideration the Dominion territories and especially the Colonial territories of Capricorn Africa. Are they, for instance, including the steel production for the next two years in places like Southern Rhodesia, or agricultural production in Tanganyika, Kenya, and so forth; or are they being left out of the picture? I have a feeling that they are not taking these matters into consideration. I hope that our great plans for this country include further exploitation of these territories and planned emigration, sending people there who will produce goods there which can be sold by this country and earn dollars. Besides food, there are such things as mica, and so forth, which can be shipped to America and earn us dollars.

My great grumble against the party opposite is that it did not take the job seriously when it was in power. They neglected our Empire, some of the richest parts of the world. I hope the Colonial Under-Secretary can give us a reply which will fit into the steps we have taken on this side of the House already—with the Groundnuts Scheme, the Overseas Food Corporation and so on, and show that the birth of the Labour Party as a Parliamentary Government was also the birth of a third Empire.

11.2 p.m.

Mr. Rankin (Glasgow, Tradeston)

The House is indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for Great Yarmouth (Squadron-Leader Kinghorn) for raising this subject tonight. The need for directing attention to it cannot be over-emphasised. For a moment or two I would like to look at another aspect without in any way disagreeing, but, in fact, entirely concurring in all he has said with regard to the need for an economic build-up of African resources, an advantage not only to Africa but also to this country. With all that I agree, and agree most thoroughly. We cannot however visualise the life of any people merely in terms of the economic set-up, because, from the economic fundament there must emerge some sort of political superstructure. It is to that aspect that I wish to direct the attention of the House.

When we look at the tragic fate of Europe today, we realise what an enormous power in shaping the economic outlook of this country today a United States of Europe would have been. There is no argument about the need. Europe proclaims that need every hour of the day. But we have to be careful when we talk about a United States of Africa in the political sense. We want to say, at the very beginning, that we are not going to create in other parts of Africa any more South Africas; that if there is to be a United States of Africa, then black and white must live on terms of greater equality than are prevalent in South Africa at the moment. When we think also of a United States of Africa we are not going to think of it in terms of the United States of America, where, again, political equality is denied to the black peoples in the Southern States. We have to be careful how we use the phrase "United States of Africa." If it is to have any meaning to the indigenous peoples of Africa, it has not only to bring them higher economic standards, but higher political ways of living and all that follows from that. I wanted to add these further thoughts to what has been said by my hon. and gallant Friend. As I said at the beginning, the House is indebted to him for having raised this matter.

11.6 p.m.

Mr. Baldwin (Leominster)

I cannot allow the remarks of the hon. and gallant Member for Great Yarmouth (Squadron-Leader Kinghorn) to pass without some reply. He made some remarks about exploiting our Colonies. I hope that will be put right by the Under-Secretary, as I understood that it was this side of the House which was always condemned for exploiting our Colonies, and it was a surprise to us to hear the suggestion made from that side of the House. I should also like to take him up on the remark about the neglect of our Colonies by the Conservative Party. Because we in this country are becoming afraid that we are going to starve, a great interest is being shown in Africa. We are trying to make our people believe that there are vast resources of food to come out of Africa to help this country. If the natives of Africa are fed properly, there will be no surplus to come out of Africa, and the sooner the Government let the people of this country know that fact the better. The natives are increasing to a tremendous extent, and they are unable to provide food for themselves at the present time. The hon. and gallant Member cannot have been in Africa or he would not have said that we had neglected our Colonies. In the short space of 60 years we have gone to Kenya, done away with the slave trade, stopped tribal warfare, taught the natives hygiene, and in the last 25 years have seen the native population doubled. If that is not something of which to be proud, I do not know what is.

Squadron-Leader Kinghorn

If the Argentine railways had been laid in Rhodesia they would not need to be taken today for our food.

Mr. Baldwin

We built a railway through Kenya to Uganda and we have laid railways all over Africa. When we begin to make a song and dance about the small sum of £150 million which it is now suggested we should spend in the Colonial Empire, when we have spent hundreds and thousands of millions in developing it in the past, it is time to remember what has been done already. I repeat that it is not fair to accuse this party of neglecting our Colonial Empire.

11.8 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Rees-Williams)

I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth (Squadron-Leader Kinghorn) for raising this subject tonight, because it is one of great importance, and one in which the people of this country are taking an ever greater interest. The time tonight is too short to deal with such a vast subject, and I hope we may have another opportunity later to deal with it at more leisure. I was glad that my hon. and gallant Friend did not explore the political possibilities of a "United States of Africa" at any great length, because as my hon. Friend the Member for Tradeston (Mr. Rankin) has pointed out, that would be a very delicate and difficult subject. The races are not homogeneous, and the problem which we have to face is to develop the tribes, which are no longer migratory and encourage them to think in terms of territorial units. That is the problem, and at the moment it is out of the question to think of a United States of Africa even if, which is not the case, most of the African territory were British territory.

The difficulty in the economic and political development of Africa is that the Colonies of the west grew out of very small trading stations. These particular stations became Crown Colonies, and finally, mainly for reasons of protection, the vast hinterlands behind them put themselves under the protection of the little Crown Colonies. That is the case in the Gold Coast and Nigeria, for example. In East Africa their origin was the pursuit of the slave traders. So in both areas there is nothing which is really an economic whole. They are part of a vast area of Africa, some of which is under British control, some under French, Portuguese or Belgian control as the case may be. There is no hope—and I believe there is no desire for it by the Africans themselves—of anything in the nature of a political United States of Africa.

When we turn to the economic side, with which my hon. Friend dealt largely in his speech, we find that Africa is a producer of agricultural raw materials. That is its main production now, and it is likely to remain so for some time to come. Our policy is to develop the economic resources of Africa in the interests of the inhabitants, and in close association with the countries of Western Europe. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has announced that policy, which has been received on all sides of the House, and in most parts of the country, with great sympathy and considerable support. We intend to have the closest co-ordination with other European countries which have African responsibilities. There is a vast number of subjects—public health, the eradication of the tsetse fly and the rinderpest virus, mass education, and the like—on which we could co-operate and formulate a common policy with the other nations in Western Europe which have African responsibilities. Only last week officers of the Colonial Office visited Paris and had a most successful conference with their opposite numbers in the French Colonial Office on many of these problems. From time to time we have held, and will continue to hold, similar conferences with other nations who have responsibilities similar to our own.

Then there is the closest co-ordination between British territories in Africa, which are neighbouring, or which are on the same coast although not adjoining. We have three regional organisations—the East African High Commission, which deals with East African territories, the West African Council, which deals with West African territories, and the Central African Council, which deals with Central African territories. This regional co-operation is essential, but a greater grouping of regions, some sort of super-region con- sisting of a number of these regions, possibly two or even three, is in our opinion undesirable. It would lead to the setting up of an administrative body with a vast horde of officials, which would result in large expenditure with very little return. Therefore, at the present moment we do not propose to go in for any super-regional organisation, and intend to stick to the three regions we have.

My hon. Friend has dealt with the development possibilities in Africa, and it seems to me there are now three vital and urgent needs. The first is to provide skilled technical assistance from this country and elsewhere; the second, to provide capital goods, mainly steel; and the third, consumer goods. It is no good exhorting the African to work harder and for more hours unless we give him something for which to work. I should say that, of all these things, the most urgently wanted is steel. When any African Governor dies the word "steel" is found written across his heart, because he realises that without steel nothing can be accomplished in Africa. Hon. Members do not need to be told what the steel position is in this country. The Government have under urgent consideration all the time this question of the allocation of priorities in steel for Africa, and priorities in other rare commodities also. We in the Colonial Office have under review the whole of the requirements not only of Africa but of the other Colonial territories, and we are in the process at the moment of considering various other matters which flow from a priority system and are essential to it. We hope that before very long there will be some fruitful results.

With reference to what the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Baldwin) said, I would point out that some 40 years ago a very famous traveller visited Africa and made a very powerful indictment of capitalist exploitation in Africa. He made a powerful advocacy of State Socialism in Uganda for the employment of the natural resources by the State. I cannot think of any better advocacy of Socialism, as applied to an infant country, than that in the book of this traveller. I need hardly say that the book is entitled, "My African Journey," and that the traveller was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Woodford (Mr. Churchill).

Mr. Baldwin

Always ahead of everybody, is he not?

Mr. Rees-Williams

Yes. In this book he describes the Murchison Falls and says: I cannot believe that modern science will be content to leave these mighty forces untamed, unused, or that regions of inexhaustible and unequalled fertility, capable of supplying all sorts of things that civilised industry needs in greater quantity every year, will not be brought—in spite of their insects and their climate—into cultivated subjection. Certain it is that the economy of the world remains hopelessly incomplete while these neglects prevail, and, while it would be wasteful and foolish to hustle, it would be more wasteful and more foolish to abate the steady progress of development. That was 40 years ago. We, too, are dreamers of dreams, but the difference between us and the famous traveller who went to Africa 40 years ago is that our dreams will come true.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Nineteen Minutes past Eleven o' Clock.