HC Deb 09 December 1959 vol 615 cc516-20
45 and 46. Mr. Driberg

asked the Prime Minister (1) if he is aware that a South African dancer of non-European descent is prevented by South African law from taking part in the Royal Ballet's forthcoming tour of South Africa; and if he will instruct the Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations to consider the possibility of cancelling the provision of funds for this tour;

(2) if he is aware that a South African dancer of non-European descent is prevented by South African law from taking part in the Royal Ballet's forthcoming South African tour; and, in view of the damaging effect of such incidents upon relations between the two Governments, whether he will make representations on the matter to the Prime Minister of the Union.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. R. A. Butler)

I have been asked to reply.

Any rules or practices affecting ballet performances in the Union of South Africa are of course a matter for the Union authorities. In the light of these, it was for the Royal Ballet Company to decide the composition of the party which is to visit the Union of South Africa.

No official funds have been provided for this visit, but the British Council has given a small contingent guarantee against loss.

I understand that arrangements for the visit are well advanced and, in the circumstances, I see no reason for intervention by the United Kingdom Government.

Mr. Driberg

Did the right hon. Gentleman note the references from both sides of the House in Monday night's debate to the arts and sport, with particular reference to the M.C.C.'s tour as well as this Ballet tour, and was no protest at all made against this particular example and illustration of the folly and wickedness of apartheid?

Mr. Butler

No, Sir. I did notice the references in the debate. It was for the Royal Ballet Company to decide the composition of the party. I have answered the hon. Gentleman's other points. I do not see on this occasion, in view of that decision, any reason for Government intervention.

Mr. Driberg

With respect to the right hon. Gentleman, he has not answered the latter part of Question No. 46. While I fully accept that the Prime Minister has said that he regards private conversations as unsuitable for public statements, can we take it, none the less, that the Prime Minister will discuss this kind of thing with the Prime Minister of the Union? I do not expect the right hon. Gentleman to reply.

Mr. Butler

I cannot give any such undertaking because this matter has in fact been decided by the Royal Ballet Company—it is its decision—and I do not think there is a case, as I have said, for intervention by the United Kingdom Government.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

Will my right hon. Friend agree that the incursion of politics into the realms of sport and music wears the aspect of totalitarianism and at all costs is to be resisted by this country?

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the introduction of racial discrimination into art and sport is thoroughly repugnant to all of us? May I ask him this? I understand that he is saying that this is not a matter for the Government because the Government are not financing this tour, but is it not the case that the Royal Ballet Company is dependent on a very substantial subsidy from the Arts Council, and can the Government really escape all responsibility for this? Did any conversations take place between the Treasury, for instance, and the ballet company and the Arts Council about this matter.

Mr. Butler

No, Sir. The Royal Ballet Company took this decision without any official intervention at all. That is a reason why I do not think that United Kingdom Government intervention is called for. The company took its decision against the background of the situation in which this company was going to perform and we have had no cause to intervene.

Mr. P. Williams

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the policy of apartheid is an internal South African matter?

Hon. Members

Is it?

Mr. Williams

It is, indeed, and in fact hostile criticism from this country very often does considerably more harm in changing policy than silence.

Mr. Mayhew

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these difficulties arose after the decision of the British Council to guarantee the company against loss and whether any opportunity has been given to the Executive Committee of the British Council to reconsider its view in the light of these difficulties?

Mr. Butler

I will certainly investigate the exact chronology so as to give an exact answer on the question of timing. My information up to date is that the British Council does not want to review its decision to guarantee against loss this particular tour which I think may do a great deal of good.

Mr. Dugdale

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that progressive forces in South Africa would welcome the Government taking a very much firmer line against apartheid than they are taking?

Mr. Butler

I think that constitutional authorities throughout the world would regard it as a great mistake for one Government to intervene in the internal affairs of another Government.

Sir G. Nicholson

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the country as a whole is most content to leave this to the wisdom and judgment of the Prime Minister?

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is not, as it happens, a matter of interfering in the internal affairs of South Africa? It is a question of whether a company which is guaranteed against loss on this particular tour, and which is heavily subsidised by the Government, should undertake a tour under those conditions? Will he please look into the matter further to see whether the Arts Council has in fact had discussions with the Royal Ballet Company?

Mr. Butler

There has been no official intervention into the Royal Ballet Company making its decision about the composition of the company to go on this tour. On the general question of whether it is a good thing to undertake this tour, we are informed by our High Commissioner that it would be valuable that this tour should take place—that is, the general conception of the tour. I do not see any further cause for intervention, although I do not deny that the Ballet Company does receive public money.

Mr. Snow

As one of the many hon. Members of this House who try to support the ballet, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the excuse given by the organiser of the ballet that this action was taken to save embarrassment on the part of the dancer in question just will not wash?

Mr. Butler

That is a matter of opinion.

Mr. Driberg

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the replies, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Forward to