§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr.Thomas Cox.]
§ 4.2 p.m.
§ Mr. Ivor Stanbrook (Orpington)I begin by declaring an interest, in that I served for 10 happy years in Nigeria as a district officer in the Colonial Administrative Service there, and I still draw a pension from that source. Many of the former and present leaders of that country are my personal friends, and I draw attention to Nigeria today because I believe that the present state of Anglo-Nigerian relations is very poor and warrants Government action.
Nigeria is the biggest and most powerful African country. It could exert in Africa, if it chose, an influence that would determine its political future for good or ill. It is also, by great good luck for us, a country in which Britain has millions of friends and enjoys a special relationship, which is of immense benefit to us. It is almost incredible to those Britons who know the country well that relations with Nigeria should have sunk to such a low level, as has been demonstrated by the events of the past two years.
Our two countries have been associated for over 100 years, ever since the British forced an antislavery treaty upon the King of Lagos in 1860. Since then, thousands of Britons have worked and served among Nigerians and share with them a long history of political and constitutional development.
The transition to independence in 1960 was one of the smoothest, friendliest and most successful of all such operations in the history of the world. One recalls the famous words used by the first Prime 884 Minister of an independent Nigeria, Sir Alhaji Abubakur Tafawa Balewa, at the time of independence, when he spoke of the British in Nigeria as having come originally as conquerors, remained as teachers and latterly as partners, but always as friends ".
Yet how the position has changed since 1975. There has been no Nigerian High Commissioner in London since then. The British High Commissioner in Lagos suffered the ignominy of having his recall requested by Nigeria on 4th March 1976, and his successor in Lagos presented his credentials only last week, so that there was a whole year of absence of dipiomatic representation at the highest level, during which time diplomatic relations with Nigeria were at their lowest ebb, and not only diplomatic relations. During that time there has been a huge disposal of the sterling balances held in this country by Nigeria. More than £1,000 million—one-third of Nigeria's total reserves—have been sold, and the manner of their selling caused the value of the pound to fall drastically on the foreign exchanges.
It is perhaps no surprise that Prince Charles has not been invited to call in on Nigeria during his impending tour, and it is no wonder that a new Nigerian High Commissioner has yet to be appointed to London. It is true that the Nigerians appear to be making little effort to restore friendly relations at official level. They may have been piqued by the British Government's attitude over the request for General Gowon's extradition. My contention, however, is that the British Government are far too complacent about the serious consequences for Britain and, indeed, for Africa as a whole if this breach is not rapidly healed.
There are abysmally few official contacts between Nigeria and Britain, and such personal contacts as there have been seem, according to Press reports, to have left the Nigerian side resentful. No doubt it was useful for the Minister of State to visit Lagos, as he did, in May 1976, but matters certainly did not improve as a result.
For the past 11 years, that is to say, since Nigeria ceased to have a Parliament, there has been no official contact between Members of this House and their old colleagues in Nigeria. There has been no Parliament there, and so there has 885 been no branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. There have been no visits to Nigeria by British politicians, and practically none by Nigerian politicians to Britain. As everybody knows, such contacts are of inestimable value to both sides. We get delegations to this House from regimes with the most dubious parliamentary qualifications, but none from the biggest and most important state in Africa.
The general cause of Nigeria's indifference is obvious. Nigeria has been through a decade of strife and unhappiness. The civil war left terrible wounds, although it must be said that it is to Yakubu Gowon's eternal credit that the policy that he and his Government pursued afterwards helped to heal those wounds in an astonishingly short time.
Nigeria has not yet found a formula for the peaceful absorption within a democratic framework of a huge area of Africa that was united only briefly, comparatively speaking, by Britain. The federal system that we left behind, incorporating one large and two small units—British evolutionists will please note—collapsed. Yet the Westminster model, embracing a multi-party State, is apparently still regarded as feasible, to judge from the draft constitution that is now being discussed in Nigeria.
It was impatience for material progress, as well as dissatisfaction with political parties, that led to military rule in Nigeria, as it did in many other parts of Africa. We must hope that after the projected return to civilian rule in 1979 there will be no repetition of the Ghanaian experience, where the military found itself obliged to take over again.
I do not need to urge upon the Government the importance of good Anglo-Nigerian relations. The trade figures alone show how dangerous it is to ignore the present trends. Nigeria is now Britain's ninth most important customer. Last year we exported goods to the value of £774 million to Nigeria, ourselves importing goods to the value of £316 million from Nigeria. Nigeria is also our fourth largest supplier of oil.
The climate for British involvement in Nigerian trade and development is exceptionally favourable. In a country of 60 million people, largely undeveloped, with a huge—by African standards—and 886 rising revenue, including oil revenues whose soldiers and senior administrators were all trained by us, whose educational system was formed by us, where our language is the lingua franca, and whose traders have associated with ours for over half a century, we should naturally have great advantages. Yet, from what we hear, we are constantly neglecting them. There is a baffling indifference on the part of some British institutions—I can give examples—to requests for help in training Nigerian craftsmen and technicians. Investment of this kind, which is bound to be fruitful for our industry, should be eagerly promoted as part of the national effort—leaving aside the question of overseas aid—rather than reduced to haggling over terms, as in a market place.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the problem is that many Nigerians are unconcerned about the present state of relations and that little time is being given to the problem in Nigeria. Recent decrees of the Nigerian Government—such as the Indigenisation Decree of 12th January this year, and the Insurance Decree of 1976—will make it more difficult for the British to invest in Nigeria. In the case of insurance—particularly marine insurance—we may well be driven out completely as a result of these measures.
When we look for the causes of this decline in relations we cannot—and indeed must not where Africans are concerned—overlook the personal level. It is sometimes said that our diplomatic representatives in Africa are not as well adjusted to the African scene as they should be. The average Nigerian is a warm personality and responds to what he sees as a sincere offer of friendship. The style that is suited to the courts of Europe does not suit him. On the whole, our diplomatic representatives in Nigeria are of high quality, but I wonder whether we are using enough of the people that we have available in the Diplomatic Service who have personal knowledge and experience of Nigeria and who know the local languages. We are fortunate in having my former colleague, Mr. Desmond Wilson, in Kaduna, but there must be several other members of the Diplomatic Service who have served in and know Africa well and whose experience is being wasted elsewhere. Even I still speak Hausa, and I think I am still pretty 887 fluent, although I have not been to Nigeria for some years.
In this connection I note that Lagos is the fourth most expensive of our missions abroad, coming after New York, Paris, and the EEC, but before Moscow and New Delhi. At first sight this contradicts my argument, but there are only about 30 officers in post in Lagos. The costs of living and accommodation, not to speak of traffic jams, in Nigeria are far above those in London. I am bound to conclude that our effort is inadequate.
It is in the political sphere that the lack of effort by the British Government is most dangerous. Nigeria is in a unique position in Africa and only recently has begun to take a positive rôle on matters such as Rhodesia and Angola. She may easily take what from our point of view is the wrong course. Yet it is not too late. Interest is one thing. Active involvement is another.
The Sunday Telegraph reported recently that there were Nigerian troops in Angola. That is not so. There are some Nigerians there engaged in training courses for police drivers, but the point is that such a development, with the use of Nigerian troops, is possible. With an army of 250,000 men—more than Nigeria needs internally—it would be feasible for Nigeria to take an active military part in the affairs of Southern Africa. Such a prospect is like a nightmare, but it should not be dismissed in the present climate of understanding—or, perhaps I should say, of misunderstanding.
On the other hand, the prospects of Nigeria's healthy recovery from the present unhappy phase are good. The time is ripe for a renewal in strength of Anglo-Nigerian amity. Although there are no political parties in Nigeria, political life at present is astonishingly strong and virile, and the Press is comparatively free.
Nigerian politicians are very resilient. Nnamde Azikiwe, the first Nigerian President, is still around; Obafemi Awolowo and Aminu Kano are waiting in the wings. Chief Rotimi Williams was Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee, and Alhaji Inuwa Wada contested the local elections—only to be unseated on an election petition. There are hosts of younger men and women 888 anxious to participate in political life, and there is every indication that Nigeria can soon be restored to the list of the world's free and successful democracies.
For that to happen, however, Nigeria will need all the friendly help, encouragement and consideration that Britain can give. I hope that she will get it.
§ 4.18 p.m.
§ Mr. Richard Luce (Shoreham)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Mr. Stanbrook) on raising the extremely important subject of the relationship between Nigeria and Great Britain. I have no interest to declare specifically in Nigeria, although my hon. Friend and I have a common interest, in that we were both district officers he in Nigeria and I in East Africa.
He has carried out a great service in highlighting our historic ties with Nigeria, and also in drawing attention to the great importance of our trade with Nigeria. I believe I am right in saying that our exports to Nigeria in 1976 were higher than to any other country in Africa, including South Africa. In addition we are increasingly dependent on Nigeria for oil imports and now 7 per cent. of our oil is imported from that country.
I wish to stress the political rôle of Nigeria. With the growing strains and tensions in Southern Africa and Rhodesia, obviously Nigeria has an important rôle to play .We must bear in mind Nigeria's geographical detachment, and yet her experience in the world means that she can have an important influence in trying to bring common sense to bear in finding a non-violent solution to the problems in Rhodesia and Southern Africa. To my mind, that is an additional reason why Britain's relationship with Nigeria should be as close as possible. I hope that the Minister will be able to say something encouraging on this subject this afternoon.
§ 4.20 p.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. John Tomlinson)I am grateful to the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Stan-brook) for raising the subject of our relations with Nigeria. I am also pleased to have been able to hear from the hon. Member for Shoreham (Mr. Luce). I am sure that both hon. Members will understand that I am replying on behalf 889 of my hon. Friend the Minister of State, who is unable to be present.
I begin by agreeing with everything that the hon. Member for Orpington has said about the importance of our relationship with Nigeria. This is not only because of the close traditional ties which, though valuable in themselves, are essentially foundations on which to build a mature relationship between two sovereign States in the common interests of both, but also because of Nigeria's importance to us as a trading partner and as one of the most important countries in Africa.
There can be no doubt that Her Majesty's Government are anxious that nothing should mar this relationship. We are confident that the Nigerian Government as well as most Nigerians share this view. We obviously cannot expect to avoid occasional disagreements—these occur in the closest of friendships—but with good will and understanding on both sides these disagreements need not damage the basic friendship which exists in the cordial relationship between our two countries.
In his opening remarks the hon. Member for Orpington said that the state of our relations with Nigeria was poor. I cannot agree with him. There have been times when our relations have been better, but I cannot agree that at present they are very poor. Our relations with the Federal Military Government are very good. There are at present no misunderstandings between us. A new British High Commissioner has already taken up his appointment in Lagos.
While I am on that point, may I refer to the remarks made by the hon. Member about the type of diplomatic representation we have in African countries? I am sure that all hon. Members, particularly those who have had any contact at all with Sir Sam Falle, will agree that in our new High Commissioner in Lagos we have a man of the highest quality who will do an excellent job representing his country. I am sure that the hon. Member will want to make it clear that he does not disagree with what I am saying about our new High Commissioner. I am pleased to see the hon. Member nodding his assent. I would not want there to be any misunderstanding over what was a valid but generalised point.
890 Nigeria's voice clearly carries weight in international discussions particularly on African problems. The Nigerian Government are understandably motivated by a strong desire to rid their continent of discrimination and oppression. This is an aim with which Her Majesty's Government strongly and clearly identify. The Nigerian Military Government are made up of sensible and realistic men. It seems obvious from their recent pronouncements that they have no wish to solve Africa's problems by violence as long as other solutions offer hope. Nor, I am sure, are they anxious to see foreign Powers taking advantage of Africa's problems to pursue their own aims.
Her Majesty's Government take every opportunity to exchange views with the Nigerian authorities on a wide range of problems, particularly the problem of Rhodesia. We understand their attitude. I hope and believe that they understand ours.
Let me deal with the point made by the hon. Member about the recall of the British High Commissioner. We recalled our High Commissioner in March last year, at the request of the Nigerian Government. In our view our High Commissioner had behaved quite properly in seeking compensation for damage to the High Commission building by rioting students, but in the heightened emotions of that time the Federal Government professed to find his action offensive, so we withdrew him. In the circumstances we had no alternative. Sir Martin Le Quesne was a victim of the sort of misunderstanding that can occasionally occur between Governments. In agreeing last year to receive a new British representative, the Federal Government demonstrated that they were as anxious as we were to speed up the improvement in relations which by then was already under way. There was no excessive delay in sending a new High Commissioner.
I think that all hon. Members would agree that it is a mistake to rush these things. We do not have senior ambassadors waiting in the wings to go suddenly to a new posting. We had to put the name of our new High Commissioner-designate to the Nigerian Government. That was done in August last year. They indicated in November that they would be glad to receive him. Then, of course, he had to terminate his previous mission. 891 Having done that, Sir Sam Falle arrived in Lagos in January and presented his credentials on 21st February. Therefore, I do not think that there is cause for excessive criticism in that direction.
Although it is really a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade, I should like to make a few comments about our economic relationships with Nigeria, because these have been referred to by both hon. Members who have spoken in this short but important debate.
It must be obvious to anyone that our economic relations with Nigeria are of great importance. As has been stated, our exports to Nigeria have risen dramatically. Give or take the odd £1 million, I confirm the figures that the hon. Member for Orpington gave. In 1976 our total trade was in excess of £1 billion. Goods to the value of £774 million were exported to Nigeria, and we imported £317 million worth of goods from Nigeria. My figure is £317 million, although if the hon. Member for Orpington prefers the figure of £316 million I am happy about that.
Nigeria is clearly our largest market outside Europe and the United States, and last year it rated tenth in our overall trade relations. However, it is important to recognise that Britain cannot presume on its traditional ties with Nigeria to expect the Nigerians always to buy from Britain. The Nigerian Government have the right and the duty to choose from where they obtain what they need in goods, services and advice. We have to rely largely on the competitiveness and energy of British firms to convince the Nigerians that it is in their interests to trade with British companies.
British investment in Nigeria is considerable, particularly in oil production and in insurance and banking. There are 892 also important investments in manufacturing, distributive and construction industries, and companies with British shareholdings have shown themselves well able to adapt to the Nigerian Government's indigenisation measures.
It is true that relations between our countries were somewhat strained last year. In February one of the leaders of an attempted coup d'état called on our High Commissioner in Lagos and asked him to send a message to the former Nigerian Head of State, General Gowon, who was at that time studying in this country. The High Commissioner quite properly refused this request, but the incident gave rise to suspicions that inside Britain there was somehow an involvement in an attempt to overthrow the Government. The Federal Military Government have now publically confirmed that their investigations have revealed no such involvement.
It will be obvious that we place considerable value on the openness and friendliness that characterises our relationship with Nigeria, but that is not to say that there is no scope for further co-operation. For our part, Her Majesty's Government will lose no opportunity to demonstrate their good will towards Nigeria and the Nigerian people.
I am sure that the House is grateful to the hon. Member for Orpington for initiating this debate. The Government certainly welcome it as a useful opportunity to make quite clear the importance that we place on our relationship with Nigeria and the value that we see in taking all steps to make sure that the friendly and co-operative relationships between our two countries are not only consolidated but strengthened over the years ahead.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-nine minutes past Four o'clock.