HC Deb 15 February 1962 vol 653 cc1495-6
9. Mr. Strachey

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what consultation he has had with the Prime Minister of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland regarding future negotiations on the Federal Constitution, following his statement that the British Parliament could not use its legal powers to provide for the dissolution of the Federation except at the request or with the consent of the Parliament of the Federation.

Mr. Braine

My right hon. Friend's consultations are continuing in Salisbury, and I think we could wait until he returns.

Mr. Strachey

May we not have an unequivocal statement from the Under-Secretary that he does not accept this interpretation of the Prime Minister of the Federation that this Parliament cannot repeal one of its own Acts, for this surely would be a most extraordinary breach of any precedent which there has ever been in this Parliament?

Mr. Braine

The Question on the Notice Paper asks me what consultations my right hon. Friend is having with Sir Roy Welensky following the latter's statement. Consultations are continuing over a wide field and I should prefer it—and I should have thought that the House would prefer it also—to wait for my right hon. Friend to return and to give an authoritative reply.

Mr. Strachey

But cannot the Under-Secretary now, meanwhile, at any rate reaffirm the statement made by the then Colonial Secretary in May, 1957? He said, concerning this issue: In regard to the question of United Kingdom legislative powers, the powers of Parliament remain unaffected. The passage in the statement"— the one referred to by Sir Roy Welensky— merely states what is the accepted practice, that the United Kingdom Government do not initiate any legislation on matters within the Federal sphere except at the request of the Federal Government."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 2nd May, 1957; Vol. 569, c. 356.] The existence of the Federation itself cannot possibly be regarded as within the Federal sphere, and cannot that be reaffirmed?

Mr. Braine

With great respect, the right hon. Gentleman is going wide of the Question on the Notice Paper. If he wants, as I understand it, a statement on the scope of the relevant passages in the joint announcement made by the British and Federal Governments in April, 1957, then that is another question and if he wants an answer to it he must put it down.

Mr. Turton

Do not Articles 97 and 98 of the Constitution lay down a provision for the amendment of the Constitution? Has not that been neglected in the question?

Mr. Braine

I do not think I can usefully add anything to what I have already said.

Mr. Healey

Is not this the second time in recent weeks that Sir Roy Welensky has attempted, by personal statements, to violate constitutional provisions made and passed legally by this House? Does not the Under-Secretary feel that he has a duty to the House to assert the constitutional position as it was defined in this Parliament and by this House?

Mr. Braine

Of course I have a duty, as does my right hon. Friend. He is having consultations on the spot and will shortly be returning to this country, when a full account of his views and of what transpired will be given. I think that it would be appropriate, in the circumstances, to await his return.