HC Deb 31 July 1958 vol 592 cc1556-9
2. Mr. Brockway

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will enumerate the authorities with whom discussions took place with the European and African Advisory Councils in Bechuanaland and the Native Authority Councils in Basutoland and Swaziland before the conclusion of the Defence Agreement with the Government of the Union of South Africa which extends as facilities in the High Commission Territories.

Mr. Alport

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on 24th July to the hon. Members for Govan (Mr. Rankin) and for Deptford (Sir L. Plummer). The consultations which took place with the appropriate authorities in the three Territories were conducted by the respective Resident Commissioners and officers of the Administrations. I would like to take this opportunity of expressing our appreciation of the part which His Excellency the High Commissioner, Sir Percivale Leisching, played in bringing the discussions with the Government of the Union of South Africa to a successful conclusion.

Mr. Brockway

But may I ask the hon. Gentleman two fundamental questions? First, why should this country enter into a defence agreement with the Union of South Africa, which has a régime which is, in many respects, more tyrannical than that of Communist countries? Secondly, why should the people of the Protectorate, who indignantly oppose any union with South Africa, be committed to these defence arrangements without being consulted about them?

Mr. Alport

I do not think that responsible Members on the hon. Member's side, any more than hon. Members on this side of the House, will associate themselves with the expression of opinion that he has included in his supplementary question. Her Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom are responsible for the defence of the High Commission Territories. We recognise, as I said in reply to a supplementary last week, the important part which the Union Government have to play in the defence of Southern Africa as a whole, and we are satisfied that these discussions, which have taken place over a considerable period of time, are related exclusively to the common interest that exists between the High Commission Territories and the Union of South Africa with regard to the security of Southern Africa as a whole.

Mr. Dugdale

Is the Under-Secretary of State aware that, to the best of my knowledge, he has not even answered my hon. Friend's question? My hon. Friend asked, "What authorities?" and the only answer given is "The appropriate authorities". Can we know a little more about who are "the appropriate authorities"?

Mr. Alport

In Bechuanaland, Chief Bathoen, as Chairman of the African Advisory Council, and Mr. Russell England, as Chairman of the European Advisory Council, were approached by the Resident Commissioner. The Resident Commissioner also consulted the African Authority in Serowe—that is, Rasebolai Kgamane—and other Chiefs in the Protectorate. Mrs. Moremi, Regent of Ngamiland, was consulted by the Divisional Commissioner. In Basutoland and Swaziland, the Paramount Chiefs were approached by the respective Resident Commissioners. The Paramount Chief Regent of the Basuto agreed to the concession concerning the road relating to the radar installation, which is on Union territory.

Mr. Bottomley

Does this mean that those who were consulted did, in fact, give their agreement? If that is not so, does it not emphasise the need to speed up the setting up of these legislative councils so that indigenous peoples can freely express their wishes?

Mr. Alport

I am quite certain that it would be the wish of the people in the Territories that matters regarding defence should remain the responsibility and decision of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.

Mr. Brockway

In view of the unsatisfactory reply, may I give notice that, with apologies for the inconvenience to yourself, I shall raise this matter at the earliest opportunity tomorrow morning?

Mr. Alport

As to the hon. Member's point of order, I personally would like an opportunity to reply to some of the points made and to explain some of these matters. I am only sorry that the right hon. Gentleman removed from the Order Paper the Adjournment Motion which was down for tomorrow.

Mr. Bottomley

On that, may I say that I, too, regret that the debate on the High Commission Territories had to be withdrawn for tomorrow. This is a matter of importance to the House. And I may say that the only reason for its withdrawal was that another very important Motion had to be debated and that the obvious responsibility rests with the Government, who should have provided time earlier.

Mr. Speaker

I think the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) gave notice late last night that he intended to raise this matter on the Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill tonight.

Mr. Brockway

indicated assent.

Mr. Speaker

Then I do not really know what he means by talking about tomorrow morning.

3. Mrs. Castle

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will publish a White Paper setting out in full the agreement reached with the Union Government and the nature and source of the representations he has received regarding the grant of defence facilities in the High Commission Territories to South Africa and the replies he has made to them.

Mr. Alport

No, Sir. The facilities to be accorded to the Union Government in the High Commission Territories have already been made public in the statement circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT on 21st July in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall). With regard to the second and third parts of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to a Question today by the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway).

Mrs. Castle

Is not the Under-Secretary aware that that is really a totally unsatisfactory reply? Is it not the fact that the Answer of 21st July merely gave the heads of agreement? What I am asking for is the right of this House to know, in detail, what the agreement was. In such an important matter as this, information about the heads of agreement is quite inadequate. Further, is the hon. Gentleman not also aware that he has evaded an answer to the Question of my hon. Friend a moment ago? What we want to know is what the people consulted said in reply to the consultations. Is he not aware that the fact that he has not answered that and his evasiveness on these two points must encourage suspicion?

Mr. Alport

The hon. Lady is calling on her imagination if she assumes that in anything that has been agreed between the High Commissioner and the Union Government there are matters additional to those which were set out under the heads of agreement. I can assure her that that is not the case, and I must say that I do not think that it is in the interests of the Territories that she should try to inflame suspicion that there is anything behind the agreement other than those matters that have already been put out.