HC Deb 23 April 1952 vol 499 cc403-13
Mr. John Parker

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies on what dates the invited African representatives from Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland are returning to Central Africa and whether he will agree to prolong their stay at least until Monday, 28th April, to allow Members of Parliament an opportunity to meet them.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

As hon. Members will have heard with regret, the delegates from the African Representative Council of Northern Rhodesia and the African Protectorate Council of Nyasaland have declined the invitation of Her Majesty's Government to remain in London to attend the Conference on Closer Association in Central Africa. Arrangement had therefore been made by their Governments for them to return home on 24th and 25th April respectively. If, however, there is a general desire in the House that hon. Members should have a chance of discussion with them, I am assured that the two Governors would be willing to arrange for them to stay here for two or three days for this purpose.

Mr. J. Griffiths

May I impress upon the Minister the importance of consulting the two Governors immediately and indicating what I am sure is the general view of the House—these Africans have come here and we know they are opposed to federation—that it is of the utmost importance that no impression should be given that any attempt has been made to prevent them from stating their case to Members of this House and to the country?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

That is why I gave the answer in that form.

Mr. Griffiths

Will not the right hon. Gentleman make it a much more generous time than three or four days, and may I ask that the African representatives be consulted as to how much time is essential for them to put their case?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

I think the right hon. Gentleman will realise that these two delegations, whom we have welcomed here and with whom it has been a pleasure to meet and talk, have come here at the expense of their Governments for a particular purpose. They came over for talks with my right hon. Friend. Those talks, unhappily, have not resulted in their agreement to stay as delegates. The Nyasaland delegates suggested that they might stay as observers. We accepted that suggestion, but unhappily they withdrew the offer after we had accepted it.

They have duties to the people who sent them here to explain in their home territories why they have come to their decision. I think it would be wrong that the period before they return home should be unduly prolonged. Some of them are Government servants with duties to do at home, but because we realise that hon. Members might be anxious to have a chance of talking with them, we have agreed that their return should be delayed for a reasonably short period. During that period I think it ought to be possible for those hon. Members who are rightly interested in discussing with them the various problems to make their own arrangements to do so.

Mr. Griffiths

Will the Minister bear in mind that if this conference continues without these African representatives being present, this, again, will have very serious repercussions in Africa? Will the right hon. Gentleman impress upon the Governors of the two territories, both of whom are in London at the moment, the necessity and the wisdom of allowing the Africans to stay here for as long as they consider a reasonable time in order to put their case?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

The right hon. Gentleman has himself had experience of conferences of this kind. They can only be attended by people who have agreed to attend. It is important, I think, that Members should have a chance of talking to the Africans, but to argue from that that it should also be necessary for them to remain here for the whole currency of the conference is, I think, carrying things a little too far. I think the reason I have given will commend itself to moderate opinion on both sides of the House.

Mr. John Dugdale

Would not the right hon. Gentleman leave it to the Africans themselves to decide how long they should remain here before going back to Africa?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

No. As I have said, some of these representatives are Government servants with duties to do in their own country. They came over here for talks with my right hon. Friend as to whether or not they were prepared to turn up at the conference. After exhaustive talks, they have declined to do so, and the purpose of their visit is therefore now discharged. Because the great mass of feeling in the House is in favour of federation, we are naturally anxious that the good will of everybody should be enlisted in these very difficult negotiations, and I should be very glad if every hon. Member who cared to talk to them did so. I hope, incidentally, that the right hon. Gentleman, who has accepted the principle of federation as desirable, will use his best offices with these African representatives, but I do not think it is necessary that they should remain in London during the whole course of the conference which they have declined to attend.

Mr. Griffiths

Is it, therefore, the decision of the Government and of the Governors of the three Central African territories that they will continue this conference in the absence of Africans and without their taking part in the discussions? The previous conference at Victoria Falls was one which Africans attended. Are we to understand that the Government have now departed from that principle and are determined to go on with federation even without consultation with and the consent of the Africans?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

The protecting Power, which is Her Majesty's Government, has a duty to the two Protectorates. In our view, that duty can best be discharged by continuing this conference, and we propose to do that. We regret that the Africans from Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia will not be present, but we have had the advantage of talking to the two delegations in the course of the last week. There will be African representatives at the conference from Southern Rhodesia, but we wish there could have been representatives from all three territories. It is our intention to proceed with the conference and to come to some recommendations. These recommendations will then be submitted to the three territories, and we hope that the sense of the recommendations and the good will of the majority of the House will combine together to secure acceptance of them in the three territories.

Mr. Griffiths

Since this is an important departure, in that the Government have decided to continue the conference in the absence of African representatives, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he will, through the usual channels, agree at an early date to a debate on this important change of policy?

The Minister of Health (Mr. Harry Crookshank)

I could not possibly, without notice, give an answer to that question on a Wednesday.

Mr. Griffiths

On a point of order. May I be permitted, Mr. Speaker, to move the Adjournment of the House on a matter of urgent public importance, namely, the decision of the Government to hold a conference on Central African Federation in the absence of African representatives?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

On a point of order. May I just correct the right hon. Gentleman on an inaccuracy he has just committed? There will be African representatives. There are African representatives from Southern Rhodesia. [HON. MEMBERS: "Stooges."] Before hon. Members call these two distinguished Africans, fellow citizens of ours, stooges, they had better wait and hear what contribution these distinguished Africans will make to the conference which only opened one hour and 10 minutes ago. I suggest that there will be African representatives present at this conference. They are not all the African representatives we wanted, but to move the Adjournment of the House because we cannot always get all the delegates we wish is surely not a proper use of the procedure.

Mr. Griffiths

Further to that point of order. May I direct your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that whether there are or are not African delegates from Southern Rhodesia is not a matter for Her Majesty's Government, for Southern Rhodesia is a self-governing Colony. What I was raising was the absence of African delegates from Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland, both of which are territories for which the Secretary of State for the Colonies is responsible.

Mr. Speaker

I am asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, to call attention to a matter of urgent, definite public importance, namely, the decision of Her Majesty's Government to proceed with the conference on Central African Federation in the absence of African representatives from Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia. Of course, I have had no notice of this, but the view I have formed is that there will be other opportunities to deal with this matter. I think it fails to fall within the Standing Order on the ground of urgency and therefore I decline to accept it.

Mr. Herbert Morrison

You have indicated, Mr. Speaker, that there will be other opportunities. Would you be good enough to indicate what other opportunities there are going to be?

Mr. Speaker

The event does not press upon us with that urgency. I think that if general interest is found in this matter in the House, there are opportunities by which a debate can be arranged. I do not think it is of sufficient urgency to fall within the Standing Order.

Mr. J. Griffiths

With respect, may I call your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that the conference only began an hour ago and that the first intimation we had of this change of policy by Her Majesty's Government was in a reply to a supplementary question put to the Minister? Therefore, I feel that the fact that the conference has begun and the policy is already in operation makes it a very urgent matter.

Mr. Speaker

I agree that the conference began only recently, but that does not mean it is going to finish at once. I should have thought that there were ample opportunities before any decisions of a binding and irrevocable character are taken to have this matter discussed without interfering with the business today.

Mr. Griffiths

An important departure in policy has already taken place, however long the conference will last. The last conference which I attended as the then Secretary of State for the Colonies, with my right hon. Friend the Member for Smethwick (Mr. Gordon Walker) as Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, was a conference attended by representatives of the Africans.

This is an adjourned conference; the Africans have refused to attend this adjourned conference, and Her Majesty's Government have decided, notwithstanding their refusal, to go on with the conference in their absence. I suggest, therefore, that the fact that the conference has begun makes it a radical departure from policy, and it is very important for this House to have an opportunity to discuss the matter at the earliest possible moment.

Mr. Speaker

I have listened with the greatest care and consideration to what the right hon. Gentleman has said, but I am afraid it does not alter my decision that this matter does not fall within the Standing Order.

Mr. T. Driberg

On a point of order. With great respect, Mr. Speaker, would you be good enough to indicate, for the guidance of the House, on what future occasion you think it would be possible, in the reasonably near future, to debate this matter in the House? I submit that the programme for some little time ahead is mapped out. There is the Finance Bill and other urgent business and, as you yourself are aware, under the procedure—[Interruption.] Will hon. Members keep quiet for a minute? Under the procedure which has grown up in recent years, the Adjournment Motion is always booked for at least 10 days or a fortnight in advance, so that it is not possible, as it was in the old days some years ago to raise a matter urgently on the ordinary Adjournment of the House the same night. Therefore, would you be good enough, for our guidance, to indicate when you think it will be possible to raise this matter?

Mr. R. T. Paget

Further to that point—[Interruption]—I am just waiting to be audible—I understand, Mr. Speaker, that you ruled that this was urgent, definite and important but that, as there would be an opportunity to consider it in the near future, the Adjournment of the House should not be moved on that matter today. There is a rule that the Adjournment of the House must be moved at the first opportunity. If it turns out that the Government do not in the near future, and before this conference can reach decisions, provide an opportunity for this matter to be debated, would you allow this Adjournment Motion to be moved again?

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid I cannot answer that as it is hypothetical. All I am saying is this. I do not know the business of the House any more than hon. Members on both sides of the House do. I get notice of it just as long as they do and no longer; but this is not the sort of issue, in which something irrevocable will be done unless the House immediately considers it, which I consider to fall within the rule, meaning and intent of the Standing Order. I have listened with the greatest care to what has been said by hon. Members, but I am sure that I am right in this, as far as my judgment goes. Therefore, I ask the House to accept my Ruling.

Mr. H. Morrison

I am in a difficulty about the basis on which—[Interruption]—hon. Members need not listen, but if they do not it will take longer. There is no hurry as far as we are concerned. I am in a difficulty, with great respect—[Interruption.] I will wait until there is quiet. I am in a difficulty in following the basis upon which you, Mr. Speaker have given your Ruling. I fully understand it, if there is clearly an early occasion upon which this matter will be debated. For example, when the Prime Minister announced on Monday that there would be a debate on transport on Monday next, I did not pursue the point about moving the Adjournment of the House. But there is no clear occasion before the House upon which this matter can be debated, and therefore I submit, with great respect, that that point rather falls down.

Secondly, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) has indicated, the conference is actually opening today and therefore the matter is of definite and urgent public importance. I submit that, taking those two points together, the Motion really is eligible under Standing Order No. 9.

Mr. Archer Baldwin

Is it the opinion that the conference should not be held because one small section refuses to take part in it?

Mr. Michael Stewart

There is one aspect of your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, which is still obscure to many hon. Members, and it is this. We understand that you have so far taken the view that this question falls on the ground of lack of urgency and not on the ground of lack of importance. But surely its importance consists of this, that in the opinion of many hon. Members a mischief is done if this conference proceeds at all in the absence of these African representatives. Other hon. Members take a contrary view, but nobody disputes that this is an important question that ought to be resolved.

If a mischief is done at all, it is being done every hour that this conference proceeds in the absence of these representatives, and there is no way in which that mischief can be prevented, if there be a mischief, unless we can discuss the matter straight away and so reduce the amount of time during which the conference proceeds in the absence of these representatives. I would therefore submit, with great respect, that if the matter is important it must also, of necessity, be urgent. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to give consideration to that aspect as well as to the points which have already been put to you.

Mr. I. J. Pitman

Is it not a fact that it is the change of policy of the African representatives in Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia that constitutes the difficulty at the present moment, and not a change of policy on the part of Her Majesty's Government? The purported reason for desiring to move the Adjournment is that Her Majesty's Government have changed their policy. In point of fact, I submit, they have not changed their policy. They have issued invitations, as they have issued them before. The difference is that in this case the two African representatives—not the Government representatives of those two Protectorates—have declined the invitation. I submit that it is out of order for us to discuss their decision to change their policy in the matter of attending a conference.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Winston Churchill)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Might I ask you to give a general Ruling on whether your Rulings on the question of the Adjournment are debatable or not?

Mr. Speaker

Strictly speaking, when the matter has been put to me properly, the House should accept my Ruling. I give my best attention to what is said, but this has been rushed upon us very suddenly. The Motion before me, as written out, omits several important words, which I do not complain of, but it is an indication of the speed with which this matter has been brought before the House. I am not complaining about it, but that is the position.

What I would say is this. I still think that this cannot be considered a matter of urgency. Matters of public importance in general, though not always, I prefer to leave to the judgment of the House, which is a better judge of public importance than I am, but I am made the judge of the two matters of definiteness and urgency, and I am bound to say, although I do not wish to carry this discussion on, that what I have heard from both sides of the House as to what is actually happening makes me doubtful as to the definiteness of what is happening, and secondly, I am sure that this is not a matter which, according to practice, should come within the rule of urgency. I am afraid I cannot alter my decision on the matter.

Mr. J. Griffiths

Mr. Speaker, may I have your permission to put a question to the Prime Minister?

Mr. Speaker

The right hon. Gentleman can put his question, but I cannot guarantee an answer, because the hour for Questions is over.

Mr. Griffiths

The question that I want to put is this. The policy of the Government of which I was a member, when I was Secretary of State for the Colonies, was to hold a conference, providing representatives of the communities, including the Africans, came to the conference. That conference was held at Victoria Falls. Now the Government have decided—

Sir Ian Fraser

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask you under what rule this question is being put, and whether subsequently it will be open to Members in all parts of the House to follow the matter up with further questions?

Mr. Speaker

Certainly not. I have allowed this question in exceptional circumstances—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] Merely in order to see if it will dispose of this matter finally.

Mr. Griffiths

The question I want to put is whether Her Majesty's Government propose to give to the House a statement indicating the reason they have changed their policy and also give the House a full opportunity to discuss the question whether the conference should proceed in the absence of the African representatives.

The Prime Minister

These are matters of great importance and, quite apart from that, there is great interest in the House upon them. I am sure that Her Majesty's Government will always do their best, subject to the demands of public business, to afford opportunities to debate these large issues. I suggest that there are opportunities open to the Opposition on Supply days, and there are other opportunities which readily occur to me but, in any case, we have no desire to prevent these matters from being discussed. On the contrary. Might they not be the subject of discussion through the usual channels to find an opportunity? The House should always be helped to talk about the things it wants to discuss, but there must be reasonable opportunity. Why not let it be discussed in the ordinary manner?

Mr. H. Morrison

I am agreeable to the matter being discussed—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Hon. Members opposite seem to be anticipating trouble today, and, by the way they are going on, they will get it. We are quite agreeable to this being discussed through the usual channels, but it is a change of Government policy—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—and it should be for the Government to provide the time. I submit to the Prime Minister that he should not be touchy about points of order, because when he was Leader of the Opposition he used to take half an hour or more on fruitless points of order.

Mr. Speaker

I hope that this matter may be discussed through the usual channels and some decision come to.