§ 18. Mr. Stonehouseasked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations why he has made no provision for the African population of Southern Rhodesia, who now enjoy the protection of the United Kingdom, to be consulted about the new Constitution and for their prior approval to be obtained for the withdrawal of the provisions which protect them from discriminatory acts of the Southern Rhodesian legislature, in view of the fact that provision is proposed in the new Constitution for the African population to have power to reject subsequent changes in the Constitution.
§ Mr. BraineThe African population were consulted through the attendance at the Constitutional Conference of Africans representing all shades of political opinion.
§ Mr. StonehouseIs the hon. Gentleman aware that the first part of that Answer is quite incorrect? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Is he further aware that 2 million people in Southern Rhodesia now enjoy the protection of the United Kingdom? Why is that protection being withdrawn without their prior approval being obtained?
§ Mr. BraineThe hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that the African representation at the Constitutional Conference in February was not limited to members of one party, and there were present distinguished Africans from the delegations of other parties as well as a representative of the Chiefs, and none of the African delegates at the conference at the time dissented from the contents of the Conference Report.
§ Mr. StonehouseBut is the Under-Secretary of State aware that those representatives have repudiated the agreement made because the Southern Rhodesian Government and the United Kingdom 1628 have gone back on the commitment then made on land apportionment?
§ Mr. BraineThis House has fully debated the matter and approved the constitutional provisions.