Clause 15.—(EXTENSION OF ACT TO COLONIES AND DEPENDENCIES.) (Hansard, 22 October 1952)

§ Mr. Bing
I apologise for seeming ill-prepared to ask this question. It is in my memory that the agreement does not apply to the dependent territories, and as this Clause does provide for application to all our Colonies it is desirable that the Home Secretary should clear up 1194 this point. I apologise to him for my discourtesy in not being able to refer him to the passage in the agreement which I seem to recollect, but cannot find at the moment—it may be in a protocol or other document attached to the agreement—which provides that when it is ratified in respect of the home country it is not automatically ratified in respect of Colonies.
If I am right in so thinking, perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman will tell us which of the States which are taking part in this have ratified the matter in relation, as well as to the home country, to their colonial territories as well. I am sorry that I have failed to refer him to the exact passage in the agreement, but I am fairly sure such a passage exists.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
There is one other item of information which, perhaps, the right hon. and learned Gentleman may be able to let the Committee have. It will be noticed that under subsection (3) of the Clause The territories herein before referred to are specified. It may be of interest for the Committee to know to what extent there have been any consultations with, for example, the legislative authorities in the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, because it would surely, of course, be undesirable that this Committee should seek to impose additional obligations or restrictions or whatever it likes to call them upon, say, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man without some preliminary consultation with the representative bodies in those territories specified in the Clause.

§ Sir D. Maxwell Fyfe
I have been trying to meet the point which the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Bing) raised. I am not sure whether he had in mind Article XX of the agreement which says: Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, the present Agreement shall apply only to the metropolitan territory of a Contracting Party. Then it lays down the procedure dealing with the subject matter, which is set out rather lengthily in paragraph 2 and is also dealt with in paragraph 3. The Clause which we are now discussing enables the 1195 Bill to apply in the Channel Isles or the Isle of Man, the Colonies, Protectorates and trust territories.
With regard to the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, the defence questions are discussed, but I do not think that really any questions under the Bill are likely to arise in that regard. The Bill is not designed to cover visiting forces from the Colonies because of the legal reason that visiting forces from the Colonies are in law regarded as on the same footing as the home forces. The effect of subsection (1) of the Clause is that the Bill can be extended so as to become the law of a territory together with any Orders in Council applying it with respect to any foreign country.
I do not think that there is any real difficulty on this matter, but, perhaps, the hon. and learned Gentleman would, as he has raised the point comparatively late, let me have a look at it again, and then I shall try, if the Report stage procedure does not enable him to raise the point, to answer it in my speech on Third Reading. I will see that it is answered.

§ Mr. Bing
Let me first thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his courteous reply, and let me delay the Committee just for one moment to explain a little more what I meant. There are some Colonies, so-called, at the moment which are practically passing into the stage of Dominions. The Gold Coast is a good example. It already has a Prime Minister and has a practically responsible Government and it is, for many practical purposes, in the experiment which we are trying there, almost a Dominion; but it is, of course, for technical purposes, still a Colony. It is to my mind highly undesirable that we should pass here a Measure which enables us, without any consultation with a country such as that, to provide a system of extra-territorial jurisdiction for troops of some other country which may be stationed there.
Perhaps I may take an example a little nearer, and one which has aroused considerable controversy—Malta. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, there have been the most bitter disputes in the Maltese Parliament about the exact rights of the American troops in Malta. I do not want to enter into, or say anything which will embitter, that 1196 dispute, which as the right hon. and learned Gentleman probably knows led a section of the Maltese Parliament to send a deputation to London to interview the Secretary of State for the Colonies about the issue.
I should have thought it was most improper to have the establishment of bases in that country without any consultation, or that we should assume the right of this Parliament, in view of the intermediary position of Malta, which not a Dominion nor properly a colony, to legislate for Malta, and say that, so far as the Maltese people are concerned, whatever Acts their Parliament passes we have put a lot of people outside their laws. I am sure the right hon. and learned Gentleman sees that that is an unfortunate position, and I think that this Clause might be looked at with a little more thought for the susceptibilities of the colonial peoples.
It is not only that the Home Secretary is giving extra-territorial rights, as I understand it, to United States troops, but he is also giving such rights to the troops of the Union of South Africa. Suppose that those South African troops, with the present racial laws, which are thoroughly deplored by hon. Members on both sides of the Committee, are stationed in the Gold Coast and have their own courts there because this disgraceful and discriminatory legislation is written into the military as well as the civil code.
Are we really saying that, by an Act of this House we are enforcing that the Gold Coast must accept the military law of the Union of South Africa, and thus accept a series of principles of racial discrimination? In the present situation it is not a very practical idea so to do. I hope that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will look at the matter again with little more consideration for the susceptibilities of the colonial peoples, considering whether it is necessary to legislate in this way, and see whether we should not provide that in the Colonies it will come into operation if there is a local Act saying that it shall do.
The Home Secretary is no doubt aware of the procedure in Northern Ireland by which an Act passed here could only come into force there if an Address is presented to the Crown or the Governor by the local Parliament. I would suggest that, where there is a local 1197 Parliament, provision should be made in this Act that it shall only come into force as far as those territories are concerned if there is an Address from the local legislature to the Governor praying that it shall be applied. I do not believe that any form of co-operation will be obtained if this Parliament attempts to enforce on a Colony legislation saying who their courts can or cannot deal with, unless there is a local request for it to be done.
I see the point that what probably was in mind was places like Gibraltar, which has no local legislature, and places like Aden, which are military areas. But, as the Clause stands, it deals with all Colonies and it is a most unsatisfactory position. I hope that before we part from the Clause, the right hon. and learned Gentleman will say that he will take that sort of question into consideration and make certain that where we have set up local legislatures we do not now impose a system without their being in any way consulted.