HC Deb 28 April 1964 vol 694 cc188-9
11. Mr. Chapman

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and the Colonies what decision about the holding of new elections has now been taken by the Administrator of St. Vincent.

Mr. Sandys

The Administrator has decided not to dissolve the Legislative Council at present.

Mr. Chapman

This is monstrous. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Commission of Inquiry which looked into the interference by Mrs. Joshua in the Public Works Department discovered quite improper and illegal acts that she was carrying out and also showed, in paragraph 11(c), that Mr. Joshua, the Chief Minister, was involved himself? If the Administrator is in difficulty because he needs, so to speak, the consent of the Chief Minister to a dissolution, how does the right hon. Gentleman expect the Chief Minister to be willing to agree to a dissolution or to recommend one when he himself is involved in illegalities and improprieties?

Mr. Sandys

I do not accept the hon. Member's allegations. The inquiry reported unfavourably upon one Minister, who has resigned.

Mr. G. M. Thomson

The report, in at least two cases, indicated that the Chief Minister himself was involved in his wife's improprieties. Will not the right hon. Gentleman look into this again? Is it not better for this country, while giving generous help and great respect to the degree of self-government that a territory has, to act very firmly when there are improprieties like this?

Mr. Sandys

Under the Constitution the Administrator has the right to dissolve, after consultation with the Chief Minister. In a territory like this, which is in an advanced state of constitutional progress, it is desirable not to act contrary to the advice of Ministers if this can be avoided, and there are certain matters which are still being looked into in the territory. For the moment I am prepared to accept the judgment of the Administrator, in whom I have every confidence.

Mr. Chapman

But the Chief Minister is involved—he is shown to be by paragraph 11(c)—because he actually turned up with some of the money to pay illegally some of the road gangs. Although it was nothing to do with him lie was helping out his wife's improprieties. If he is involved, how does the Secretary of State expect him to advise his own dissolution? Surely we must now use our reserve power against the Chief Minister.

Mr. Sandys

The hon. Gentleman has merely repeated his former question.

Mr. Chapman

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply and the repudiation of responsibility by the Secretary of State, I beg to give notice that shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment.