HC Deb 31 July 1958 vol 592 cc1759-76

11.54 p.m.

Mr. A. Fenner Brockway (Eton and Slough)

When I gave notice earlier this afternoon that I intended to raise the matter of the Protectorates, I said that I would be doing so in the early hours of the morning. I am glad to find that I was wrong by six minutes and that we are still meeting on Thursday night. I apologise to you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, for keeping you so late, and I express my appreciation to the hon. Member the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations for being in his place, and to the civil servants who assist him on these occasions.

But I make no apology for raising this issue. The High Commission Territories are important to a greater extent than their own populations or areas. They are important because they are either bordered by the Union of South Africa or—in one case—surrounded by that Union. Whatever happens in those territories will have a profound significance on future events in the Union itself. I am one of those who believes that the most effective way in which this country could exert an influence towards liberty, human equality and good race relations throughout the southern area of the continent of Africa would be to make our own Protectorates models of advancement, social and economic progress and racial equality.

I could tonight raise many issues in relation to the Protectorates. Sometimes when I hear the régime in the Union of South Africa denounced I feel that we should be careful how we do that, because of the conditions in our own Protectorates. I am very well aware, for example, that thousands of those who are residents in our own Protectorates have to leave to gain a livelihood within the Union of South Africa, and I might be excused tonight if I spent some time in drawing attention to the appallingly low standard of wages which exist for workers in our British Protectorates.

Or I could tonight develop the important new effects of the discovery of mineral resources in these three British Protectorates. For very many years now we have spoken with deep feeling about the conditions which surround the gold mines, the diamond mines, and now the uranium mines in the Union of South Africa—the compounds in which men are segregated, the pass system, the shack towns, the wage standards.

I think I should be doing a service tonight if I were to urge that when minerals have been discovered in our own Protectorates we should take precautions to ensure that those conditions should not be repeated in areas for which we are responsible, and particularly that Africans who are employed in them should have the opportunity of being trained for skilled jobs so that in time they may be able to fulfil any function in the development of those mineral resources.

However, because of the hour I shall refrain from developing those points, and I propose to concentrate on two matters which are now of urgent importance. The first is the need to begin to establish legislatures in the High Commission Territories, and the second is to sound a warning regarding the defence agreement which has been made with the Union of South Africa.

If I interpreted the Under-Secretary's tones correctly at Question Time, he felt that I was a little unjust in referring to the arrogance of the system under which one individual, who does not even live in the High Commission Territories, by personal decree, has all the power of the law. I do not know of any territory on the whole face of the earth where the law is in the hands of one man as it is in the case of the British Protectorates in South Africa. In that remark I was not referring to the personal character of Sir Percivale Liesching, I was referring to it as a system. I say that in this democratic age, where we are recognising the right of people of all races and colours to advance towards self-government, it is an absolute anachronism that there should be British territories where the personal decree of one man, the High Commissioner, should be the law of these areas.

I am quite aware of the fact that there are resident commissioners. I am aware that there are advisory councils in those territories. I am aware that, in the last resort, the Minister for Commonwealth Relations in this country and the Under-Secretary responsible to this House are the final authorities. But when Westminster is seeking to govern territories thousands of miles away, the action of the High Commissioner in Pretoria who can govern, by decree, inevitably has a bigger influence than we can exert from day to day here, and inevitably the Minister in this country must act largely on his advice.

Within the last few weeks there have been two remarkable developments in the British Protectorates in the advance towards the establishment of legislatures. I should find it difficult to express the welcome which I feel towards the recommendation given by the Joint European and African Council in Bechuanaland for the establishment of a Legislative Council there. I will acknowledge that when Tschekedi Khama and Seretse Khama were in this country some of us discussed with them the possibility of the African Advisory Council making this proposal. We did not dare to hope that the European Council would make a similar recommendation. It is a thing of profound significance to South Africa where racial antagonism exists between white and black. It is a thing of profound significance for Central Africa, where there is now conflict between the African and European races regarding their franchise and their legislature, that Bechuanaland should have this great honour of being the first territory in the British sphere in Africa where Europeans and Africans have united in making a demand for the establishment of democratic rights.

It is especially significant in the South African context because of its influence within the Union, where Africans, Indians and coloured persons are denied any legislative rights at all and are denied any right to vote. This is the kind of influence that I want to see in the Protectorates extending to the areas around, and I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will give it the warmest welcome. More recently, within the last ten days, what has happened in Bechuanaland has also happened in Basutoland, not in the sense of a joint proposal by Europeans and Africans, but in the Basutoland National Council. There the demand has been made for the establishment of a legislature.

I do not want to speak in an over-controversial way this morning. Therefore, I say to the hon. Gentleman that I welcomed the speech, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. J. Johnson) referred today, which he made when in South Africa. My appeal is that the example which has been given in Bechuanaland and Basutoland by their recommendations, and which undoubtedly will be followed before very long in Swaziland as well, should be made the first concern in the mind of the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend the Minister, and that during the period of the Recess a great effort should be made to work out proposals so that when we meet again at the end of October the hon. Gentleman will be able to bring proposals before this House which will satisfy the demand of the Joint Council in Bechuanaland and the demand of the Basutoland National Council.

I pass from that to the defence agreement. Again, I sensed that hon. Members were a little disturbed, because at Question Time I asked what fundamentally is the case for Britain entering into a defence agreement with the Union of South Africa when that Government in many respects is more tyrannical than the Communist countries against whom that defence agreement is being prepared? I choose my words very carefully. I think hon. Members know that I have a passionate belief in liberty and denounce the totalitarian aspects of Communism with a sincerity which no hon. Member can exceed. But in the Union of South Africa we have a majority of the population denied the vote, not on grounds of education, not on grounds of income, not on grounds of civilisation or culture, but only on the ground of the pigment of their skin. I do not know any principle in political relations which could be more tyrannical, more un-Christian, more utterly indefensible, for any Government to pursue than that. When the Government of South Africa applies that kind of principle of apartheid, I say in that respect—

Mr. W. T. Aitken (Bury St. Edmunds)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy-Speaker. Is it not completely out of order to refer to the internal affairs of another self-governing part of the Commonwealth? Surely that is a question we are rather careful about in this House?

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir Gordon Touche)

It can be done only by comparison with others.

Mr. Brockway

I may have been over-emphasising it, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, but I was doing it by comparison. What I was asking is that fundamentally and as a matter of principle, if the cold war is really a matter of ideology, if it is really a matter of liberty and democracy against totalitarianism and against the denial of liberty, then theoretically there is no more reason why we should have a military agreement with a Government which protects apartheid in South Africa than with Governments on the Communist side which are tyrannical and which are oppressive.

However, I pass from that to the second point which I raised at Question Time. Why should the Protectorates, except for their geographical position, be involved in a defence agreement with the Union which is their abhorrence and which is their great fear? It is their abhorrence because the vast majority of the people in the Protectorates are Africans who resent the policy of apartheid. It is their great fear because they are always anxious lest the Union of South Africa shall carry out the policy of incorporation and involve them within the Union. I want to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what consultation he or his representatives have had with African opinion in the territories. I have read his answers to Questions very carefully, but he has said nothing more than "with the appropriate authority".

The Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. C. J. M. Alport)

May I say that I answered it at considerable length and in detail during Question Time today?

Mr. Brockway

I was in the House and listened to the best of my ability—but I have not had the answers in their printed form—and I am not satisfied. In the case of Bechuanaland, did consultations take place with the African Advisory Council or the European Advisory Council, or with the Joint Advisory Council? In Basutoland, was there any consultation with the Basuto National Council, which is the representative body of the African population? In Swaziland, was there any discussion at all with the Native Authority? With whom did these discussions take place, and what was the response by those with whom the discussions took place? What did the Chiefs say? What did others say?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will give a detailed reply, because I take the view that almost the last tyranny of all is the imposition on any people of military arrangements which they themselves have not willingly accepted.

I want next to look at the actual proposals in this defence agreement. They were stated in detail in HANSARD on 21st July. They include, first, over-flying rights, which are reciprocal; secondly, search and rescue operations; thirdly, an air strip in Bechuanaland to be inspected for use by South African Air Force aircraft in case of emergency landings; fourthly, a short access route through Basutoland; and fifthly, the right of the South African Defence Force to carry out reconnaisance of an emergency route to South-West Africa across Bechuanaland.

Incidentally, before I deal with the matter in its broader aspect, I want to ask whether the Commonwealth Relations Office has taken into consideration that South-West Africa has been incorporated in the Union of South Africa against the recommendation and will of the United Nations. It was a Mandated Territory. The Union of South Africa has defied the United Nations in that matter. I ask the Minister to consider very carefully indeed whether defence arrangements which involve our Protectorates, which mean that the South African Defence Force will have the power to carry out an investigation or reconnaisance of an emergency route across Bechuanaland to South-West Africa, ought to be made. Have the implications of that, from the standpoint that the Union has incorporated South-West Africa illegally, in the view of the United Nations, been properly considered?

The hon. Gentleman may say that in general these are small and exceptional concessions to South Africa. I say to him that, once military concessions of this kind are begun, inevitably they extend. They were begun in 1955. They are extended now. Unless we protest now, what will they become in another three years? There is a very real fear among the peoples of the Protectorates that the steps now being taken will hopelessly prejudice their position in their resistance to incorporation with the Union of South Africa.

We are discussing tonight one of the critical areas of the world, critical for liberty, democracy, racial equality. The Protectorates offer a great opportunity for us to contribute to the triumph of liberty. I hope that the hon. Gentleman, in replying, will reassure us and remove the doubts which the Government's policy has engendered in our minds.

12.18 a.m.

Mr. Graham Page (Crosby)

Some of the remarks of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) should not go unanswered from the back benches on this side of the House. With much of what he said I profoundly disagree, but I wholeheartedly agree with him upon the importance of this subject. At least, if he has done nothing else, he has given us the opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State on the great success of his recent visit to the High Commission Territories.

It is a matter of pride that the Commonwealth Relations Office, with all its obligations in the relationships between this country and the vast Commonwealth of Nations, can spare the time for the Under-Secretary to visit what one might call some of its smallest charges, though they are very important ones. Swaziland has about a quarter of a million population, Bechuanaland about a third of a million, and Basutoland about half a million—not much more than a million people in all, yet they are places of real importance to us, not from an economic point but—I will use the word the hon. Member used once or twice—from an ideological point of view. It is gratifying, too, that there have been, as I see it, immediate results from the visit of my hon. Friend to the High Commission Territories, both political and economic. Our responsibilities to these territories are surely political, economic, social and, in a sphere which the hon. Gentleman mentioned, defence, both internal and external.

The hon. Gentleman complained of the defence agreement with the Union, but surely this is a most sensible agreement. It would be utter folly to drop a sort of iron curtain between the Union and the High Commission Territories. I believe, and believe most sincerely, that the future of the High Commission Territories is with us, and I am second to none in resisting any encroachment on the High Commission Territories by the Union, but that does not mean that we should discard any idea of co-operation in defence of those territories. After all, we do not get frightened about the Channel Isles becoming a départment of France because France belongs to N.A.T.O. Surely we should co-operate in defence matters. It seems to me gross exaggeration to see something sinister or evil in those items of defence, which the hon. Gentleman gave the House, as being undertaken in those territories by the Union.

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman gets his information about the people of the High Commission Territories being frightened or disturbed by this. So far as my information goes, the African leaders see no valid objection to this arrangement.

Mr. John Stonehouse (Wednesbury)

Would the hon. Gentleman please tell us from which sources he gets his information?

Mr. Page

I have certain friends among the African leaders in these territories, from whom I have taken the trouble to obtain as much information on this subject of defence as I could in the short time available.

Although the three territories are very diverse and it is difficult to make any generalities, there is one significant thing about all three territories, and that is the quality of the African leaders these territories have produced. In Bechuanaland, the name of the Khamas is well known to the House, but they are not the only African leaders wise in administration in that territory. Chief Batheon and others in that territory have proved themselves. In Swaziland, Sobuza II, the Paramount Chief, has been a wise and prudent administrator. In Basutoland, I would not go so far as to say that the Regent is a brilliant administrator, but with her advisers she has always gone along the path of administrative reform and improvement.

It is a significant thing that instead of becoming autocrats, as these African leaders might have become, because in many cases they are head and shoulders above their fellow men there, they have become more and more earnest and active democrats, and it is they, the African leaders, who urged the British administration to establish democratic institutions. I am sure they would all admit that they have had great guidance from the British Administration in doing that, even if the guidance at times has been the restricting hand of a parent.

Because of that guidance from the British administration, and because of the good relationship which one finds in the High Commission Territories between the African and the ordinary European there, those democratic institutions are now proceeding on the basis of partnership, as indeed the hon. Gentleman the Member for Eton and Slough drew attention to in referring to the resolution of the Joint Advisory Council in Bechuanaland.

Can we have any doubt that Bechuanaland is progressing rapidly towards a Legislative Council? I know that my hon. Friend will probably have to be cautious about this, because it is still under examination by the High Commissioner and the constitutional experts, and so on, but in face of that very significant resolution, proposed by Mr. Russell England and seconded by Tshekedi Khama, in the Joint Advisory Council, proposing that Legislative Council and the repetition of that resolution in the African Advisory Council, proposed by Tshekedi Khama and seconded by Seretse Khama, I feel confident that the Legislative Council will come, and come very soon.

I hope that in the first instance it may be based on an equal representation of Europeans and Africans with, of course, to start with, an official majority. But that is the sort of partnership which one hopes to see in these territories.

In Basutoland, the partnership is rather different because there are no European settlers there, but progress is towards a Legislative Council there as well as a council which will turn this partnership between the British administration and the Paramount Chief, plus her Council, from a rather unsatisfactory dualism, as it is at present, into a working partnership. There, I imagine, the appropriate thing is an entirely African Council with a smattering of civil servants as members. I would not be afraid to give that sort of Council in Basutoland power to legislate for Europeans, provided, of course, that there were certain subjects reserved to the High Commissioner for a time.

In Swaziland there is, of course, a substantial European population, and it seems that a partnership can proceed there. The European Advisory Council has been working for a long time alongside the Paramount Chief and his Council. I am not sure of the line of progress here, but, as I say, I think that a partnership between European and African administration would be beneficial to the country. Perhaps the structure will develop from the great success achieved in the development of local government in Swaziland.

But all this political development must surely be based on economic development. I do not make that statement merely from the point of view of the production of the finance on which to base political and social advance, but because I believe that a good economic development is the cradle of good and responsible government.

In Bechuanaland, for example, as hon. Members know, the whole basis of life is cattle. It is the life blood of the country. The C.D.C., with its Lobatsi abattoir, has done a great work in developing the cattle industry. But that cannot remain as a monopoly for ever. I hope that it will develop quickly into some form of producers' co-operative. It is in that sort of sphere of business management that the African learns responsible administration.

Dissatisfaction had been growing over the past few months in connection with the Lobatsi abattoir, and I am deeply grateful to my hon. Friend for responding so promptly to representations on this matter and for sending an officer of the Department there to review the situation. I hope that from that review some form of producers' co-operative may emerge.

Mr. Stonehouse

I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman would agree that there is a grave handicap to the development of producers' co-operatives in Bechuanaland in so far as there is no department of the administration set up to assist the development of co-operative societies.

Mr. Page

I think that the hon. Member is quite right. The Department in Basutoland has had great success in developing a co-operative movement. I hope that something on the same lines may be done in Bechuanaland.

I hope, also, that in Bechuanaland the mineral development will prove successful, particularly the prospecting in the Bamangwato. It has been wise to leave negotiations of the mineral rights there so largely in the hands of the African leaders. One cannot tell at present what form the partnership between the Africans and those who wish to develop the minerals will take. They might find a precedent from the partnership between the Paramount Chief of Basutoland and Colonel John Scott in the development of diamonds in Basutoland, because there the Africans really benefit from the development.

Swaziland, of course, abounds in production potential, both agricultural and mineral. The Colonial Development Corporation has played, and looks like playing, a most important part there, and looks like playing an even more important part in sugar development there, now that the Union has given a large contract to Swaziland for sugar.

Perhaps my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations could put on record the total funds of C.D.C. and C.D. and W. which have been subscribed to the High Commission Territories. It is not generally realised how much comes from this country for the development of those Territories.

The hon. Member for Eton and Slough tended to give the impression that everything was at a standstill in the matter of the advance of the African, whereas great schemes of development are going ahead. The territories, of course, always want more, particularly in the development of communications. C.D. and W. roads are being developed in Basutoland and Swaziland, and Bechuanaland will benefit from defence agreements by reason of the road to South-West Africa.

The main restriction on development in these territories is the lack of railways, and it is here that we need a working arrangement with the Union. It seems to me that both the Union and the United Kingdom are, on this subject, playing a game of poker. I know that it is very expensive to lay a railway, but I have always wished that more consideration could be given and more investigation made into the production of a railway from the source of coal and iron ore. If there is coal and iron ore one can build rails on the spot and, as it were, pull oneself along by one's own bootlaces, laying the railways from the mine outwards. There would be a great possibility of development of railways in these territories by that means if only we had some working arrangement with the Union.

Too often criticism is made of the British administration of these territories without a realisation of the great work that is done there. We ought to offer sincere praise to those who carry on the administration in these territories and, indeed, to the British public for the financial support it gives to the territories. To say that is to speak in no way in derogation of the administrative achievements of the African leaders. Without being complacent, I think that we can be very optimistic about the future of these territories.

12.35 a.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. C. J. M. Alport)

The hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) will realise that I seldom find myself wholly or, indeed, largely in agreement with points which he puts in the exchanges which we have in the House from time to time on this and similar subjects.

I am very glad indeed that he has taken the opportunity, let slip by his Front Bench, to bring forward this subject for debate before the House rises for the Recess. I have been most anxious to have an opportunity, in conjunction with other hon. Members who are interested in this matter, to discuss in the House some of the problems of the High Commission Territories and perhaps to put right some of the misconceptions about them.

For instance, the hon. Member was quite wrong to depict these territories as neglected or depressed. The one impression I have from my recent visit to them is that they are on the whole extremely happy areas in Africa. If the whole of Africa were as happy as the High Commission Territories, it would be a very happy and contented place indeed.

It is perfectly true that there are criticisms of the Government, which is inevitable where direct administration exists, but we have a very good story to tell about the administration of the territories. As a result of my visit, I have no impression that there is any wish to see any change in the relations of the territories with the United Kingdom.

I am sure that that arises from the confidence which has been inspired in the peoples of these territories, both European and African, by the high standard of the administrative officers who serve there. One does not often get a chance to say this, and I want to pay an especial tribute to the three Resident Commissioners now serving there, and to their administrative officers and their technical advisers.

The truth of the matter is that the brunt of the work of building up and developing these territories, apart from the normal work of administration, falls upon their shoulders. What is of the greatest importance is that we should continue to ensure that the best type of administrator and technical adviser is made available.

Of course, to some extent that depends on the salaries which the territories are able to offer, as compared with other Colonial Territories in other parts of Africa. This is a matter which the High Commissioner has been anxious to have considered and which the Commonwealth Relations Office is equally anxious to have carefully considered. It has, therefore, been decided in principle that a commission should shortly visit the three High Commission Territories to consider the salaries and conditions of service for both European and African members of the various branches of the administrative services. In addition, I hope that they will be able to look into the question of the remuneration for the technical officers at the same time.

We fully recognise that to increase the ability of the territories to pay the salaries which are required and to meet the expenditure necessary for the development which is to take place in education, social services and the public services generally, it is essential that we should proceed with economic development as far as the resources of the territories allow. I fully recognise the part which the co-operative organisation can play, especially in a country like Bechuanaland which is at present dependent for its economic strength almost exclusively upon a single industry, the cattle industry.

I am glad to be able to tell my hon. Friend, the Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) that we have obtained the services of Mr. B. J. Surridge, Adviser in Co-operation to the Colonial Office, who will be leaving this country on 13th August to visit the territories and will report on the appropriateness of co-operative methods for cattle raising in Bechuanaland. He will also visit Basutoland where already there is a flourishing co-operative movement in being.

I do not think he will be able at present to visit Swaziland, but I can report that there has recently been an investigation into co-operation there carried out by the Co-operative Officer from Basutoland, and that a report submitted by him as a result of his visit is being studied by the Resident Commissioner.

This is one side and a not unimportant side of the development taking place in the economic organisation of the country but, of course, again it depends largely upon resources. There has been some progress in Basutoland in finding diamonds, as a result of the confidence which exists between Colonel Jack Scott, a very distinguished and experienced mining engineer and proprietor in the Union, and the Basutoland people. I can only hope, for the sake of Basutoland, that his investigations are successful.

My hon. Friend has mentioned progress which is being made in investigating the coal and iron ore resources of Swaziland. It is true that Swaziland, which was, only a few years ago, the Cinderella of the territories, is now on the high road to full development of its resources. We hope that the coal and iron ore will contribute to this but, of course, there is the allied question of ensuring that as these resources are made available communications which are necessary to carry them to the markets they need are also made available, and here we have very recently raised a loan of £1 million for road development in Swaziland. It is a small territory and this is a substantial sum. It shows the determination of the Administration there to ensure that as the resources of the territory become developable so the transport which is essential is brought into existence.

I fully agree with my hon. Friend that in Bechuanaland the negotiations which have been going ahead between the Rhodesian Selection Trust and the Bamangwato tribal authorities provide an extremely interesting experiment in partnership. I hope that they may be brought to a successful conclusion and as a result there will be same addition in the form of mineral resources to the economic strength of the territory.

The Colonial Development Corporation is under a certain amount of criticism, particularly in Bechuanaland, and the operation of the Lobatsi abattoir has been criticised. It has gone through difficult times, but recently it was announced that there was to be a contract for a substantial amount of meat to be exported from Bechuanaland to Israel. If this provides a permanent new market for the industry, in addition to the developments that have been taking place in the Congo and in the Federation, then the future of the industry is very greatly strengthened and that could not have happened if the Lobatsi abattoir had not already been in existence.

Therefore, whatever may be the criticisms of the past, the fact that there are now distant markets becoming available for the cattle industry in Bechuanaland is a result of the investment made by the Corporation in difficult days in that abattoir.

The hon. Member for Eton and Slough asked me two questions. He referred to constitutional proposals. We cannot at present make any comments on the proposals which have been debated in the Bechuanaland Joint Advisory Council, or those which have been debated in the Basuto National Council. These await the recommendations and views of the High Commissioner. But I can assure the hon. Member that we are extremely interested in and encouraged by the points of view which have been expressed in regard to this type of constitutional development.

It would be quite wrong and improper for me to try to commit my noble Friend as to the decision that he would make in the outcome, but I can assure the House that this type of development will be looked upon with great sympathy by my noble Friend and the Government. At present, we await the views of the High Commissioner on the various proposals which have been put forward. They must be very carefully considered in the light of all the circumstances before any final decision is made.

As for the defence discussions, I think that the House will agree that the hon. Member for Eton and Slough appeared to be trying to scrape together as many grounds for criticism as he could find, but that he found the material at his disposal extremely scanty. The truth is that these defence agreements are commonsense agreements in the circumstances of southern Africa. In the case of three of them, the advantages lie as much on the side of the Protectorates as on the side of the Union, and the impact that the other two would have on the Protectorates is small in the extreme. In any case, as far as somebody like myself, who is not an expert, can appreciate, they are logical to the development of the defences of southern Africa as a whole, in which the High Commission Territories have as great an interest as anybody else.

It does no service to whatever point of view the hon. Member may have in mind to exaggerate and cast doubt and suspicion upon something that is quite straightforward and is a commonsense solution and the basis of a reasonable partnership in the defence of a part of the world that is extremely important to us.

Mr. Brockway

Will the hon. Gentleman make some reference to the question I put about South-West Africa having been incorporated into the Union against the recommendation of the United Nations?

Mr. Speaker

I must intervene here. That was an action of the South African Government, for which this House is not responsible.

Mr. Brockway

I regret the fact that you, Mr. Speaker, were not here when I first referred to the matter, and that I expressed myself badly just now. My point is that one of the arrangements of one of these defence agreements is that there shall be an emergency route to South-West Africa, across the Bechuanaland Protectorate, and we are responsible for this agreement. I asked the hon. Member whether he had taken into account the implications of this emergency route to South-West Africa, in view of the fact that South-West Africa had been incorporated into the Union against the recommendation of the United Nations.

Mr. Alport

I can assure the hon. Member that all relevant—and I emphasise the word "relevant"—considerations were taken into account when these agreements were made.

I have already replied, in Answers to Questions last week, to most of the points relating to defence discussions which have been raised by the hon. Member. This is a late hour, and I do not want to keep the House any longer.

Mr. Stonehouse

We should like an answer to the question raised as to what consultations took place with the inhabitants of the Protectorates.

Mr. Brockway

And with what organisations.

Mr. Alport

If I may say so, I do not think that the hon. Gentleman was present, but I gave that in very great detail in answer to Questions earlier today, and it will be in the OFFICIAL REPORT tomorrow. If he wishes any further information after studying the OFFICIAL REPORT, the hon. Gentleman is perfectly at liberty to put down further Questions when we meet after the Recess.

I was saying that this is late and I do not want to keep the House unduly, but I do hope that, when hon. Gentlemen, and particularly, if I may say so, the hon. Member for Eton and Slough, are raising matters relevant to the High Commission Territories, they will bear in mind the remarks I made earlier about the achievements which these territories represent for administration by the United Kingdom—administration carried out on a basis of liberal and highly progressive principles, in the interests of the people of those territories.

I hope the hon. Gentleman will remember that out of these territories we have had no economic advantages in all the years that we have administered them. On the contrary, we have given many millions of pounds to the improvement of the conditions of the life of the people of that part of the world, and it is time, if I may say so, when, whether other people outside this country give us any credit for it or not, at any rate hon. Members in this House should pay credit where credit is due.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.