HC Deb 10 November 1949 vol 469 cc1539-48

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

10.11 p.m.

Mr. Keeling (Twickenham)

From coal we pass to cocoa. I am sure that every hon. Member who stays in the House will already know that the cocoa industry of the Gold Coast is threatened with complete destruction by a small insect called the mealy bug, which carries the virus of swollen shoot from tree to tree. So rapidly has the disease spread that one tree in seven is already infected. Cocoa is, of course, the lifeblood of the Gold Coast. At least one-third of the population of that Colony depend upon it. It constitutes something like 90 per cent. of the agricultural exports, and it is also a very large dollar earner. In a good year Gold Coast cocoa may earn as much as £20 million forth of dollars. Unfortunately, America is so disturbed by the failure of the Administration to eradicate swollen shoot that she is looking elsewhere for other sources of supply.

The disease has been known for 10 years, but so far only one remedy has been discovered, and that is to cut out, to destroy, the infected tree. No way has yet been discovered of protecting the healthy tree against infection. That conclusion was reached long ago by the British Administration and it was confirmed early this year by an international commission of three experts who visited the Colony.

What have the Government done to put this cutting out policy into effect? The reason I am raising this subject tonight is that their administration was critically examined only 10 weeks ago by a cocoa conference which met in London, and which was attended by representatives of the trade and of the Government. It attracted very little notice in our attenuated newspapers, and so I want to tell the House something about it. The Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, who attended, claimed that great progress has been made—he said that there had been an enormous change in the last 12 months—and the Secretary of State himself also spoke of progress. But the fact is that it is the mealy bug which has made progress—devastating progress. It is true that the situation has changed, but it has changed very much for the worse. The disease is still gaining ground, and the position is more critical than ever before.

The House has learned to expect complacency both from the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary, but never was there less ground for complacency than here. Figures were given in another place last March which showed that the number of trees infected was then increasing nearly four times faster than the number being cut down, and although the disease grew much more rapidly in 1948 than in 1947 the rate of cutting out was very little greater. I hope the Secretary of State will be able to produce later and better figures tonight, but it seems most unlikely, because I have here a statement issued by the Public Relations Department in Accra on 6th October, which says: The situation continues to be depressing and unless it improves considerably—of which there seems to be no likelihood in the next few months—steps will have to be taken to review the whole position. This recent conference was attended by many experts and administrators fresh from the Gold Coast, and also by all three members of the International Commission of which I spoke. I want to quote a few statements which were made at the conference. Sir Harold Tempeny, an agricultural chemist with wide experience of the tropics, said: There are indications that the tide of the disease continues to rise, and we have to face the unpleasant possibility of an ultimate disappearance of the cocoa industry. A director of Cadbury's, who is also a member of the Cocoa Research Panel, said: All we have done is to put out little bits of the fire here and there, but it catches fire again very quickly. Mr. Hammond, of the Gold Coast Department of Agriculture, said; The efficiency of the treatment is very doubtful. Finally, the Conference itself, an exceedingly representative body, summed up its conclusions in these words: It is disturbing that so little has been accomplished. We are still only swimming slowly against a strongly ebbing tide, which is sweeping the whole industry towards destruction. We concur in the view of the International Commission, which said, in effect: The problem has not received, and is not receiving, adequate attention; it must be tackled on a much larger scale. In view of all this, it will be interesting to hear what grounds the Secretary of State for the Colonies has for the optimism he has voiced.

Mr. Nally (Bilston)

When?

Mr. Keeling

I have not got time to make all the quotations, but I refer to the answer which he himself gave only two or three weeks ago. At the end of 1946, some time after the full extent of the threat was realised, cutting was made compulsory and was approved by the Legislative Council, on which even then there was an African majority. But early in 1948, because of the riots which took place in the Gold Coast, compulsion was abandoned. That I think was a very grave mistake.

All the evidence given at the Cocoa Conference was that the task of cutting out is made immeasurably more difficult when the consent of every individual has to be obtained. When compulsory powers could be used the Department of Agriculture worked where it liked, and so it made the most efficient use of the staff available. Today one farmer may apply for cutting out, but his neighbour may refuse and the contagion may spread. The diseased tree lives for two years, during which it is a constant source of infection. Dr. Berkeley, one of the international Commissioners, said: With a piecemeal proposition, you may have to take two steps backward for every step you take forward. The official figures I gave just now prove that. I regret, therefore, that compulsion was abandoned, and I am quite sure that if it had been retained the situation would have been very different today.

I admit, however, that at this moment compulsion is not a practical proposition, because it can hardly be re-imposed at the very moment when responsibility, and indeed, power, is going to be handed over to a mainly African executive council. We all hope that the Africans will use their new power wisely and well. It is for them to consider whether to reimpose compulsion in view of the utter failure of consent. It is certain that they will be judged very largely by the way in which they grapple with this terrible problem, which is by far the most important problem of the Gold Coast today.

One of the questions which the new African Ministers will have to consider will be the mortgage system. Almost every cocoa farmer mortgages his crop. When the Government urge him to cut out diseased trees he not unnaturally says, "That is all very well, but it will reduce my chance of paying off the mortgage." The West African Cocoa Board have done very little about this problem. In other Colonies, however, and particularly Cyprus and Zanzibar, a great deal has been done, so that the farmers are almost freed from the millstone of debt. If the new, mainly African, Gold Coast Government tackle this matter, it will help to reduce the farmers' reluctance to cut out.

Pending the setting up of a new Government in the Gold Coast, what is to be done? I am sure that the Secretary of State would agree that the British Government cannot escape its responsibility during the interval. First of all, far more strenuous efforts must be made to recruit the necessary staff, which is required for two purposes. The first purpose is to persuade the farmer to agree to cutting out. He must be got to realise that however painful the elimination of swollen shoot may be, the whole of his future depends upon it. Secondly, staff are required to supervise the cutting out and the payment of compensation. Without an adequate staff for those two purposes, the disease will continue to spread.

At the conference, Dr. Berkeley, whom I have already quoted, said: If cutting out is to be of any real value it must be done on a much larger scale. I do not want to say that you should have 200 or 400 men. You should have all the men required to do the job and should forget about what it costs. The Cocoa Conference as a whole was not at all satisfied that the efforts to get the necessary staff were being pursued with sufficient energy. Questions were asked, such as, "Is the pay offered adequate to attract?" "Why are there no advertisements in the British daily papers?" "Have the universities been approached?" "Could not Dutchmen who have served in Indonesia and who are now out of work be recruited?" That suggestion was made by a Dutch professor of agriculture, who knew what he was talking about.

On the other hand, there were official excuses about the difficulties of accommodation and training. One official actually said that the building used for training supervisors had been taken away by the Government. In Heaven's name, why was the building taken away? It was also said by officials that the department could only handle a few men at the time, and that too many would be an embarrassment. But the conference was unconvinced. Its feeling was summed up by a member of it who said: We have a Colony which might well go under for lack of men, who could be trained in five months. The second thing which must be undertaken is intensive research to find a remedy for swollen shoot other than cutting out. No money should be spared on this either. But it is not at all certain that any remedy will be found, and therefore unless and until such remedy is found, cutting out must proceed ruthlessly. As long as we remain responsible for the administration of the Gold Coast we shall fail in our duty if we do not double and re-double our efforts to conquer the mortal danger which threatens the Colony today.

10.26 p.m.

Mr. Nally (Bilston)

Although I appreciate that there is considerable merit in what has been said by the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Keeling), the mealy bug is not a thing which has suddenly arisen since the Labour Government took power in 1945.

Mr. Keeling

I agree.

Mr. Nally

The danger of the mealy bug and the difficulties it was likely to cause to this most important crop, upon which the economy of so many people and territories depended, was well known prior to 1939. It is completely unfair to pretend, even by inference, that even before the outbreak of the war it was not well known among those who were interested in this sort of problem that the mealy bug, although at that time not developed as it is now, might assume the proportions of a menace. It is a matter of fact that in 1939 many organisations, including an organisation with which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was associated, had repeatedly drawn attention to the potentially catastrophic dangers which existed if sufficient money and staff were not devoted to the problem, which at that time, I agree, was in its infancy.

The major point to be made concerns the research, organisation and number of staff now being deployed in a situation which is much worse than ever it was. If we compare the appropriate figures for 1938 and the present figures, the Secretary of State and the Government, far from being ashamed at what is being done—

Mr. Erroll (Altrincham and Sale)

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in Order for an hon. Member to introduce party politics into a discussion at a time when the Gold Coast is faced with delicate and difficult constitutional changes, and seek to spoil a Debate which we hoped would help the Gold Coast and not hinder it, as will the adoption of a narrow-minded attitude like that of the hon. Member for Bilston (Mr. Nally)?

Mr. Speaker

On the Adjournment anything is in Order.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd (Mid-Bedford)

It is unwise, but it is in Order. It is a great pity.

Mr. Nally

The attempt of the Opposition to denigrate the present administration of the Colonial Office has done no service at all to the cause of the Gold Coast.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

There are the same advisers whoever is in office.

Mr. Nally

With this Government there is not only the question of advisers but the long-term points of view held by our Ministers, and we rely on our Ministers. Since 1945 more money and more research have been devoted to this problem than ever before, even though the problem existed in 1938. It is unfair to say that the Secretary of State has been optimistic about this. The truth is that in every Parliamentary answer and every statement he has made, although he has pointed out that more money, more people and more research have been devoted to this than ever before, he has never failed to point out that the difficulties have assumed crisis proportions. Far from there being any attempt by me to raise a party point, an attempt was made in some context to pretend that the Secretary of State had done less than his duty in dealing with a problem which was in his mind and in his heart before hon. Members opposite even thought of it.

10.30 p.m.

Mr. Erroll (Altrincham and Sale)

In the odd moment which I may be allowed, I should like to point out that the cutting out of these trees is a very drastic remedy, and it is questionable whether the trees can now be cut out fast enough. I hope that the Secretary of State can give us an assurance that the rate of cutting out of the trees is equal to the rate of progress of the mealy bug itself. Equally, I think that we should remember that the drastic remedy adopted for foot and mouth disease in this country has been successful, and is an example which the natives of the Gold Coast might well remember.

There is no ground for complacency, and I hope that in the reply of the Secretary of State tonight there will be no suggestion of complacency. It has been suggested that the new constitutional arrangements which may take place in the Gold Coast will provide a fine test of their ability to apply their new political power to this very great problem. I think that is a very severe test to apply to a new cabinet, if a cabinet is to be formed. I hope the Colonial Office will not shirk the responsibility of dealing with this disease by wishing it on to the Gold Coast under any new constitutional arrangements made there.

10.32 p.m.

The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Creech Jones)

I regret the note of party polemics which was struck by the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Keeling) in introducing this Debate tonight.

Mr. Keeling

Which sentence?

Mr. Creech Jones

The suggestion that the Government, or I myself, have been complacent in regard to this problem I completely and utterly repudiate. No one has demanded more, or shown a greater sense of urgency, or stressed the imperative need for tackling this problem in the Gold Coast, than I have. On no occasion have I expressed any optimism in regard to the manner in which the campaign was being carried on in the Gold Coast. I have always indicated the gravity of the disease, the effect it was likely to have on the vital industry, and the effect it was likely to have in regard to the revenues of the Gold Coast; and how it would, sooner or later, sap the economic future on which the prosperity and happiness of that particular territory depended.

But this is really a baffling problem. It is not merely an agricultural problem which can be tackled in a straightforward way by people who understand scientific methods. It is fundamentally a political problem as well. Consequently it is impossible for the Government to go forward with compulsory measures the effect of which would only be to inflame a difficult political situation and to cause very considerable trouble in that area. The basis of all effort in regard to this disease must be education, persuasion, and the winning of the confidence of the farmers in the technical advisers of the Gold Coast Government.

It is easy enough for the hon. Gentleman to come here and say that it is wrong for the campaign of compulsion of 1948 to be brought to an end. But he knows that if that policy had been persisted in, the whole Gold Coast would have been ablaze. It must be remembered that the Commissions which visited the Gold Coast, first the Watson Commission, and later the International Commission which was appointed as a result of the Watson Commission's Report, did not complain about the abandonment of the policy of compulsory cutting out. Indeed, those Commissions recognised that in the political situation which existed there, the abandonment of that policy was essential. I do want to stress that if one wants to defeat the efforts to deal with this problem, the surest way is to launch compulsion so far as the treatment is concerned.

Mr. Keeling

If I may take one moment of the time left, I would ask the right hon. Gentleman if he recalls that I distinctly said that compulsion was not practical politics today.

Mr. Creech Jones

Yes, but the hon. Member said it was wrong on the part of the Gold Coast Administration to have varied its policy in April, 1948. I am completely certain of the fact that it was politically wise of the Government to have taken that line in April, 1948, and equally certain that considerable disturbances would have followed in the Gold Coast if the policy had been persisted. That was made very clear in the Watson Committee Report when examining the causes of the disturbances in March and April last year.

What is the position to-day? I have never said that we are happy and satisfied with the progress made, but I repeat that no fewer than six million trees, up to the middle of this summer, have actually been cut out; and that process has proceeded at the rate of 350,000 trees a month. There is greater application for cutting out from the farmers who, as a result of the active campaign of propaganda through the Press and over the radio, are made aware of this. On every occasion of the Governor's tour there is a greater awareness of the gravity of this disease and a greater desire for the only treatment discovered to be applied. We have reached a point where, as a result of education and persuasion, the farmers are clamouring for the cutting out to proceed, and we are unable to cope with the applications made.

Mr. Keeling

What is the use of cutting out at a rate of 350,000 trees a month—which is a little more than four million a year—when the Government said in another place that even a year ago the rate of infection was 15 million a year.

Mr. Creech Jones

I agree that the disease is, as I have always said, increasing at a rapid rate, but there were practical difficulties in coping with the rate of the disease. We have had to pursue a vigorous policy of education largely because of the political difficulties in the Gold Coast. If the hon. Member thinks the Gold Coast Government could have proceeded forthwith with a policy of cutting out, then I say to him that that is the surest way of losing the territory and causing disturbances. Surely he will agree that that is not a very happy way of handling political or economic policy in our territories.

This matter is very much in the mind of the Governor. Every time he has made a tour of the area he has brought out the importance of cutting out; he has mobilised the African farmers' opinion and he has the endorsement of most of the political leaders in the Gold Coast and has, at last, obtained general consent for his policy. He will, at the meeting of the Legislative Council which is to be held at the end of this month or the beginning of next, put forward his campaign in the hope of catching up with some of the backlog in this matter.

In the meantime, a great deal of training is going on; supervisors for the campaign are being recruited; many are actually at work. Assistants to the supervisors are going through their training and large numbers of men are going in the labour gangs which have been engaged for the cutting out. We do not want a flare-up in the Gold Coast. It should be appreciated that the conducting of this campaign, even with goodwill, does call for a great deal of effort; but as there is the survey which will go on during the harvest time, I hope a great deal more will be done when the current harvest is reaped.

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'Clock and the Debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Nineteen Minutes to Eleven o'Clock.