HC Deb 09 May 1960 vol 623 cc31-7
The Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. C. J. M. Alport)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a statement.

Sir Edgar Whitehead and my noble Friend the Secretary of State continued the series of discussions which they have been holding on the future of the Southern Rhodesia Constitution.

The United Kingdom Government stated that their ability to accept a scheme which would reduce or withdraw the powers vested in the Secretary of State in relation to the Southern Rhodesia Constitution would depend on whether arrangements could be devised and agreed by both Governments which would provide effective alternative safeguards, particularly in respect of discriminatory legislation and land rights, and in respect of amendment of the Constitution.

Sir Edgar Whitehead put certain broad proposals designed to provide such alternative machinery. It was agreed that these should be the subject of joint study by the two Governments, and that a further meeting should be held later in the year and before the Federal review.

Mr. Marquand

I should like to ask the Minister of State three questions. First, did Sir Edgar Whitehead put forward proposals which, in the words of the statement, "would reduce or withdraw the powers vested in the Secretary of State"?

Secondly, why does Sir Edgar White-head want a further consultation before the federal review, and why has that been agreed? Is Sir Edgar still contemplating secession from the Federation?

Thirdly, and most important, is the hon. Gentleman aware that the removal of any sort of safeguard protecting the Africans from discrimination, whether in regard to their personal or to their land rights, would not be accepted by this House of Commons unless it were asked for by the African majority of Southern Rhodesia after a proper process of democratic consultation?

Mr. Alport

First, the right hon. Gentleman wild know from the statement I have just made that the proposals put forward by the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia were in a preliminary form. Therefore, it would not be possible at present to judge whether they will meet the considerations which the United Kingdom Government have said are the prerequisite of any reduction or withdrawal of power.

Secondly, I cannot say why the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia wishes to have a further conference before the end of the year, before the federal review, although, of course, it is natural that he should wish this matter should be proceeded with, from his own point of view, with as much speed as is possible in the circumstances.

Thirdly, I have noted what the right hon. Gentleman has said, although, frankly, I am not aware that he has the right to speak on behalf of the House of Commons in this matter. This is a matter which the House of Commons will no doubt decide for itself in due course.

Mr. Marquand

Is the Minister aware that I have the right to speak on behalf of the Opposition—[HON. MEMBERS: "Which part?"] I speak on behalf of the Opposition, and I know that the view I have expressed commands the support of my right hon. and hon. Friends. Will the Minister of State remember that this Constitution of Southern Rhodesia is a matter for the House as a whole, in which the opinion of the Opposition has to play an important part, and always did?

Mr. Alport

The right hon. Gentleman makes his claim to speak for the Opposition with more confidence than might, perhaps, be true of some of his colleagues, but I do recognise—as, indeed, I said in answer to the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question— that this is a matter for the House of Commons in due course.

Sir G. Nicholson

Is my hon. Friend aware that on both sides of the House there is keen appreciation of the heavy responsibility resting on this country for the protection and welfare of all races in that part of the world? Will he undertake that no final decision is reached by Her Majesty's Government before the views of the House have been obtained?

Mr. Alport

We are fully aware—as, indeed, the actions and policies followed by Her Majesty's Government during these last months and years have shown —of the very great importance of fulfilling our responsibilities to all sections of the community in Central Africa, and certainly to the Africans, who form a very important section in that community.

Mr. Brockway

Is it not the fact that this Government and Parliament now have the right to veto legislation in Southern Rhodesia that is discriminatory on racial grounds? Is it not a fact that the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia is now asking for the withdrawal of that right of this House? If that is so, will the Minister of State be very careful indeed not to accept any proposals that will limit the right of this House to safeguard the African population in Southern Rhodesia?

Mr. Alport

I do not think that on this occasion I should go into the details of the provisions of Sections 28 and 31 of the Southern Rhodesia Constitution. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman has stated them absolutely correctly, but I know the meaning of his supplementary question, and in so far as it relates to those two Sections it is perfectly true that in respect of that my noble Friend the Secretary of State has responsibility under the Constitution and, therefore, of course, to Parliament.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

Does the Minister appreciate that the great advantage of the present guarantees that are embedded in the Constitution is that they provide for decision by an outside independent Power—namely, this country—and that no guarantee that is simply an internal Southern Rhodesian matter can possibly be a substitute for the guarantee that is at present embedded in the Constitution? I am not asking for details, but will the hon. Gentleman say whether the nature of the scheme that he has under consideration envisages this country giving up its responsibility with regard to the Africans in Southern Rhodesia?

Mr. Alport

At this present stage I think that I can go no further than to remind the hon. and learned Gentleman that the statement I have just made spoke of "effective alternative safeguards". The hon. and learned Gentleman is, of course, quite right in emphasising the importance of ensuring that any alternative is as effective as the provisions at present in the Constitution.

Mr. Dugdale

What is the point of making this statement if we are not to know what these proposals are?

Mr. Alport

The point of making the statement is to provide the House—as my noble Friend and I thought that it would wish—with the results of the discussions that have so far taken place between by noble Friend and the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia in this the second preliminary stage in the general discussions on the future of the Southern Rhodesia Constitution.

Mr. Thorpe

Since this will affect the status of the Federation, can the Minister of State say whether Sir Edgar Whitehead intends to give the Monckton Commission the benefit of his view, or does he intend to boycott the Commission?

Mr. Alport

That is not a matter for me, but for the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia.

Mr. Callaghan

I want to return to the question of consultation. Does not the Minister's last statement but one mean that the House of Commons will not have the opportunity to examine the proposals until conclusions have been reached between Sir Edgar Whitehead and Her Majesty's Government? Assuming that the Government stand on that, whoever has the right to speak for us, who will speak for the Africans.

I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman a question that I have asked of him before and to which I have not had an answer. What are he and Sir Edgar Whitehead doing to ensure that the views of Africans, on any alternative means of safeguarding their rights—and the Africans are suspicious about Sir Edgar Whitehead safeguarding their rights— might be made known so as to make sure that when the matter finally comes to this House we can know what are the views of the Africans in the territories, because although we may be their protectors they are the object and the subjects of the protection?

Mr. Alport

The hon. Gentleman is as well aware as I am that the final say in a matter of this sort on the form of constitutional change rests with Parliament in the United Kingdom. As far as consultation with the Africans is concerned, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said on 18th February: … in the event of any change being made in the Constitution of Southern Rhodesia, the interest of Africans would of course be given full weight."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th February, 1960; Vol. 617, c. 1417.] That statement was repeated by my noble Friend when he had an interview with representatives of certain African political interests in Southern Rhodesia.

Mr. Callaghan

The hon. Gentleman will see, will he not, that giving the views of the Africans due weight is not necessarily the same as consulting them about proposals? Is it not reasonable, in circumstances such as these, where tension is so high, and where some of the African leaders are still in detention, that the proposals which are now being discussed between Her Majesty's Government and Sir Edgar Whitehead should be made known to the millions of African people whose future is affected by them, so that they can tell the House of Commons how they view the alternative safeguards that are now being discussed?

Mr. Alport

It has always been contemplated that, when these proposals which come from the Southern Rhodesian Government have reached a point where they are available for general discussion in Southern Rhodesia, general discussion will take place, as is quite clear, but that is a matter which must be for the initiative of the Southern Rhodesian Government.

Mr. Gaitskell

Why should this be left to the initiative of the Southern Rhodesian Government? Surely Her Majesty's Government have a very direct responsibility in this matter. I should like, first, to ask the hon. Gentleman what arrangements Her Majesty's Government are making to ensure that the views of the African people in Southern Rhodesia are made known upon this issue. Why should they be brought in at the last minute in these discussions? Why should they not be consulted earlier?

Further, when this joint study which the hon. Gentleman mentioned in his statement is to take place, why is it necessary that a further meeting should be held presumably with a view to a decision before the federal review? Will this not confront the federal review with a fait accompli in this matter? Why the hurry? Will the Minister please answer these questions and give some information?

Mr. Alport

The right hon. Gentleman will realise that the discussions have been going on since November of last year, and, while there is the proper hurry that is associated with changes of this sort, what we are most concerned with is that whatever answer comes out of these discussions should be one which carries full support here and in Southern Rhodesia itself.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

Including the Africans?

Mr. Alport

Of course, including the Africans. Secondly, the responsibility for making certain that that support is forthcoming rests in the first place upon the Government which are taking the initiative with regard to the change—in fact, the Southern Rhodesian Government themselves.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is it not a fact that under the Constitution Her Majesty's Government are responsible for seeing that there is no discriminatory legislation against the Africans in Southern Rhodesia? Even if one concedes that that responsibility has not be adequately discharged, the responsibility remains. If that is the case, surely it is Her Majesty's Government's responsibility, before consenting to any change in the constitutional arrangements, to ensure that the African people for whom she speaks, and on whose behalf she acts, should be properly consulted?

Mr. Alport

What should be the nature of the eventual conference on this matter, if a conference takes place, is a matter for decision later. I have been reporting on the last round of the discussions and I referred in my statement to the next round. It does not necessarily follow, although it may be possible, that that is the decisive round.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. There must be some limit to these questions.