HC Deb 06 May 1953 vol 515 cc357-61
2. Mr. Hector Hughes

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is being done by the Colonial Office and by the Government of Northern Rhodesia to explain the proposed scheme of federation to the peoples of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland who will be affected by it.

Mr. Lyttelton

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. and learned Member on 4th March.

Mr. Hughes

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that it is a condition precedent to the success of this scheme that the Africans should be persuaded that it is wise and expedient, and will he take some steps to explain it to them, instead of forcing it upon them?

Mr. Lyttelton

I quite agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman about the necessity of doing everything we can to explain the scheme to the Africans. That is what we are doing in many ways. I would draw the hon. and learned Gentleman's attention particularly to broadcasts and newspaper articles in papers in the vernacular in addition to those other measures which I told the hon. and learned Member about before.

37. Mr. J. Johnson

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what answer he gave to the message which was received by him from the Nyasaland Chiefs' Conference at Lilongwe on 14th and 15th March, 1953, regarding Central African Federation.

Mr. Lyttelton

None, Sir.

Mr. Johnson

Is the Minister aware that the chiefs of Nyasaland have declared that they will pursue a policy of non-violence and non-co-operation, and that they will also pursue a policy of non-collaboration in district councils and provincial councils alike if Central African Federation is carried out? Does he think that that is a basis on which he can implement federation in the future.

Mr. Lyttelton

I suggest that the hon. Member has got into his supplementary very much wider issues than could possibly be suggested by the Question on the Paper.

Mr. Hale

But would the right hon. Gentleman say why he did not return an answer to this message?

Mr. Lyttelton

The communication does not appear to call for one.

38. Mr. J. Johnson

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what instructions he has given to district officers of Nyasaland in the matter of presenting the proposed scheme of Central African Federation to the African peoples.

Mr. Lyttelton

Instructions to district officers are a matter for the Nyasaland Government who, as I informed the hon. and learned Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes) on 4th March, and reminded him today, are causing the district administrations to make every effort to explain and commend the proposals.

Mr. Johnson

Is the Minister not aware that many of these district officers should not have been asked to handle political matters of this kind, and can he please tell us if the district officers were asked at any time to give their own comments on this action that they were asked to undertake by the Nyasaland Government?

Mr. Lyttelton

I think it is the duty of district officers to attempt to explain Government policy. It is part of their functions, and this principle has in no way been abrogated by the instructions sent to district officers.

Mr. Dodds-Parker

Will my right hon. Friend not agree that if such instructions had been given two years ago the great mass of these difficulties would never have arisen?

Mr. Lyttelton

My hon. Friend must not ask me to answer for proposals for which I was not responsible.

Mr. Wigg

In order to improve relations with Nyasaland, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the district officers to circulate a copy of the Bishop of Nyasaland's letter which appears in "The Times" this morning?

Mr. Lyttelton

I shall certainly not make any representations to the district officers on that point unless numerous other letters in contrary terms on the subject are also circulated at the same time.

41. Mr. Hale

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the functions with reference to the administration of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland which will remain vested in the Parliament of the United Kingdom when the present proposals for closer co-operation in Central Africa are fully implemented.

Mr. Lyttelton

In all matters outside the competence of the federal government the functions of the United Kingdom Parliament remain entirely unchanged. Legally the functions of Parliament will remain unchanged even in matters within the competence of the federal government. I must, however, say that on matters within the competence of the federal government, United Kingdom Ministers will not be able to accept responsibility in Questions and in debate, save where that is laid upon Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom by the federal constitution.

Mr. J. Griffiths

We can discuss this later, but did I gather aright from the Secretary of State that even when the scheme is implemented and federation comes into existence, no question can be asked in this House about the federal government, the federal parliament or their actions?

Mr. Lyttelton

I think the right hon. Gentleman slightly misunderstands me. I think the principle on which we act is that United Kingdom Ministers, although Parliament remains legally responsible, cannot be asked to answer questions about administrative matters and other things for which they do not hold direct responsibility.

Mr. Griffiths

But since it is understood and agreed that the protectorate status of the two northern territories will be preserved although they are part of Central African Federation, surely that brings it within competence of Ministers to answer Questions in this House.

Mr. Lyttelton

Yes, that is covered by the first part of my answer in regard to matters outside the competence of the federal government, that is to say, that on all matters concerning the territorial Governments, in the functioning of which an obligation on the United Kingdom Parliament is implied, Ministers will answer Questions, and the position remains entirely unchanged. It is only on other matters that there is a difference.

Mr. Griffiths

This seems to be of importance. Do I understand that Questions about the territorial Governments will still be answerable here, but am I right in gathering that my first impression was right and that Questions in regard to the federal government and the federal Parliament will not be the responsibility of Ministers here, and that, therefore, we will have no opportunity of asking Questions in this House?

Mr. Lyttelton

The right hon. Gentleman goes far too fast because there are matters concerning the federal government, in fact the most important ones, about which this House will still be able to put Questions to the Ministers responsible, but there are matters of day-to-day administration which I think the Table will rule are not the responsibility of Ministers here to answer.

Mr. Hale

But will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind what the White Paper specifically said that Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland will continue to be Protectorates under the Crown, while at the same time it goes on to allocate the specific subjects for the federal government, such as foreign affairs, defence, taxation, administration of law and order and so on, leaving no function whatever in the hands of the Imperial Parliament? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider following the normal Government practice of introducing an Amendment in the House of Lords to make this thing clear?

Mr. Lyttelton

This is getting really wide of ordinary matters dealt with by Questions. The hon. Member is entirely wrong in supposing that the functions left to the territorial Governments are very small. They are extremely large, and in regard to these the present practice will continue.

Mr. Dugdale

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that if a matter is referred by the African Affairs Board to the Governor and finally to the Colonial Secretary, Questions could be asked on the matter in the House of Commons?

Mr. Lyttelton

I should imagine so, but the right hon. Gentleman will hardly expect me to anticipate the decisions of Mr. Speaker on such a matter.