HL Deb 27 March 1928 vol 70 cc648-56

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Lovat.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Power to create new legislature for British Guiana.

1.—(1) It shall be lawful for His Majesty in Council to create and constitute, in substitution for the existing legislature, a legislature for the Colony of British Guiana in such form and with such powers as His Majesty in Council may determine, And from time to time to alter and amend the constitution of the legislature and any powers thereof; and any such Order in Council may provide that, notwithstanding the powers conferred on the legislature thereby, there shall be reserved to or conferred on His Majesty full power by Order in Council from time to time to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Colony of British Guiana.

LORD OLIVIER moved, in subsection (1), to omit all words after "thereof." The noble Lord said: This Amendment raises the issue which I put to the noble Lord on the Second Reading—namely, the question whether it is desirable to take powers in this Bill to legislate on every subject by Order in Council for the Colony of British Guiana. We are all familiar with the Constitution of British Guiana, and I think it is undesirable to encroach further on the privileges of the electorate of British Guiana than is necessary. The noble Lord, on the Second Reading, said that this power of legislating by Order in Council was necessary sometimes in periods of emergency such as the late War. I would like to ask how far it was found necessary to legislate specially in the late War by Order in Council. My recollection of defence schemes was that we had certain cut-and-dried orders when a state of preparation for war arose, which the Governor of the Colony had to issue, and we had certain cut-and-dried ordinances or laws prepared in the Colony, which were to be introduced when the Colony was so instructed by the Secretary of State. Was there any difficulty in British Guiana with regard to enacting any necessary provision which was desired by His Majesty's Government owing to the state of public emergency? Was there any difficulty owing to the fact that there was no power to legislate by Order in Council?

The second point is one that really fills me with a certain amount of suspicion. The noble Lord, on the Second Reading, said:— I sincerely hope that one of the advantages given by the powers conferred by, this Bill will be that it will be possible to have a certain Civil List. That is not possible at the present time. The present situation is that so far as the Judges of the Supreme Court are concerned, they are established by law and their salaries are safeguarded by law. As regards the staff of the Colony, there is a Civil List, but it is a Civil List which is renewed and re-voted every five years. That, at least, was the case within my knowledge of the Colony. It was a quinquennial Civil List, and on that Civil List you had the Governor and quite a long string of other officers—a longer string than we had in Jamaica—and it included the salaries of stipendiary magistrates, not singly but in a lump sum. So I think the judicial officers of the Colony at the present time are entirely safeguarded from any attacks on their salaries by the Legislative Council.

Then comes the question as to whether it is necessary and desirable, British Guiana having hitherto had the privilege of voting a Civil List every five years, to establish a permanents Civil List. I think that if you do not wish to take a somewhat drastic line against the Colony of British Guiana, the Colonial Office would be well advised to leave matters as they are at present, unless they have it in contemplation to increase the salaries of the Civil List, and unless they have it in definite contemplation to impose heavier burdens on the Colony than the Colony has hitherto shown itself willing to bear. Is there any definite intention of imposing on the Colony a higher salary for the Governor, or anything of that sort, which the Colony has not hitherto been willing to bear? It has hitherto voted a salary of £4,000 a year to the Governor, and contingency allowances of £1,000 a year. A salary of £4,000 is lower than the salary of other West Indian Governors, but the £1,000 for contingency allowances is allowed by the Treasury to count, so that pension rights of the Governor of British Guiana would be the same under the Colonial Governors (Pensions) Acts as those of any other Governor.

Is there any drastic reason for establishing now a Civil List, and is it not desirable while you are taking this sort of liberal attitude towards other things, that you should not say: "We are giving you a fairly liberal Constitution, but we are going to interfere with that Constitution as far as the voting of the salaries of the officers is concerned whenever we think right." I think that is a very dangerous attitude to take up, and it is likely, it seems to me, to give rise to very much more alarm in the Colony and to create more feeling there than anything the Government have done. If it can be avoided it seems to me that it should be.

Another thing to which I wish to draw attention in the speech of the noble Lord is his reference to the Indian forester who came over from India after having served a year and found that his salary was not safe. If you do not have a regular forest service you obviously cannot have an organised plan for the administration of that service. Once a regular forestry service is established you would have all the advantages of such a service. But, again, I think it is very questionable whether, as a matter of principle, you ought to make a forestry officer an established officer on the Civil List. If you were going to take the view that here is this large undeveloped province of British Guiana with its forests: we are going to take into our hands the responsibility of developing that estate, and because that is a matter of urgent public importance we are going to impose a fixed Civil List of foresters on the Colony: that would be a definite position to take up. But is it intended to take up that position? If you are not going to take up that position I put this to your Lordships. Where you have judicial officers to safeguard it is a matter of principle that they should be safeguarded; but where you have merely a possible economic interest to be safeguarded, surely that is a matter which is better left to the general judgment of the community.

I think it is very undesirable that officers, even technical officers, should be exempted from the criticism of the Legislative Council. I remember a case that went on in Jamaica a few years ago in which there was a very acute contest between the elected members of the Council and the Governor in regard to certain emoluments of the director of railways. In that case, I think, the Governor had finally to exercise his power of declaring the matter to be a question of paramount public importance—a proceeding which was very stringently criticised in the Colony, and not only in the Colony. In that case there had been unquestionably a continued muddle made by the Colonial Office in regard to the emoluments of the officer. In their criticism of what had been done the elected members were perfectly right, and when the question of his salary came up, his salary was cut down partly on that account and also on the ground that the elected members were dissatisfied with the administration of the railway, although the Governor had taken the view that the administration of the railway was a matter of paramount public importance. Similarly, you might say that the director of railways ought to be put on the Civil List. That is a very unsound and a very unnecessary position, to my mind. It is just as unsound as in the case of the forestry officer that I mentioned.

The Colonial Office is not always right in its judgment between the elected members and the Governor on any question of practical administration of the Colony. In this case of the railway, the Secretary of State transferred the manager of the railway to another office, where, I hope, he has given more satisfaction. As a matter of fact, the immediate result of the changing of that officer was that the railway was very much better managed than it had been under his control. It has gone ahead and has more or less assumed the position into which I, having had very considerable knowledge of that railway, was perfectly sure it could be brought. At any rate, the judgment of the elected members in criticising the salary of that officer was perfectly sound. Similarly, I am not at all prepared to believe that the judgment of the elected members, who are living in the Colony and who really have a great interest in it, is not always to be trusted in criticising the management of the Forestry Department. So far is that from being a matter of definite urgent public importance, that I think it is much better, in the interests of sound government, that it should not be put on the Civil List. I believe that the matter of the forestry officer's salary has been got over now. But where you have not a judicial office but an administrative office, the principle is perfectly sound that so far as possible you should leave it to the judgment of the elected members; because, after all, they are sensible men of business, and I have frequently found that their opinion, as against that of the Colonial Office, has been perfectly justified having regard to the practical considerations.

I should like to ask His Majesty's Government how far they propose to put the scheme of forest administration upon a permanent basis. If they propose to do that, rather than that there should be a Civil List I would prefer the passing of a law dealing with the whole Forestry Department in the same way as the Civil Department is dealt with. That is why I wish that the words I propose to omit should be omitted, as well as for the reason given by the noble Lord in introducing the Bill—namely, that he wishes to set up a Civil List. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 12, leave out from ("thereof") to the end of subsection (1).—(Lord Olivier.)

LORD LOVAT

Two points have been raised by the noble Lord in moving his Amendment. The first, in reference to the power to confirm an Order in Council, is as to whether that power was used at the time of the Great War, and how His Majesty's Government are able to get over the difficulty that, according to the noble Lord, there was no such power in British Guiana at that time. May I point out that His Majesty has power by Order in Council to legislate in British Guiana on all other subjects than finance. The noble Lord will recollect that the first legislative action taken there by Order in Council was the repeal of the Slave Laws as early as 1806 or thereabouts, and from that time forward a number of actions were taken until, if my memory serves me, 1842 or 1843, when the question was raised as to whether His Majesty could deal by Order in Council with the question of finance. If the noble Lord's Amendment were accepted the power of the Crown would be lessened and would be below what existed before, and that is not a matter which His Majesty's Government can contemplate.

On the second point, which I think is the important one, the question of the Civil List, may I say this. The reference I made to the question of the vote on forestry and the Civil List, was not to the List as matters would be in the future but to what the state of things was in the past. As the noble Lord is aware, the Court, not the Policy Court but the Combined Court, has the power of the purse, and the forestry and other officers did not feel that they were in a safe position when their salaries might be reviewed, not every five years but, I think, every year. The situation will be entirely different when there is a single Legislature which deals not only with policy but with finance as well. Then you will have policy going hand in hand with the means of executing that policy. The Gilbertian position which exists at present in which a portion of the Legislature can pass finance and the elected body can then make that inoperative will cease to be. Therefore, we have not to look at the state of things before this Bill becomes an Act but what the position will be afterwards. May I assure the noble Lord that there is not the least intention on the part of His Majesty's Government of foisting any particular Civil List on the Government of British Guiana?

I agree with the noble Lord that the provision as regards the placing of experts is by no means satisfactory at the present time. I sat on a Committee which recently reported on the subject of agriculture. It is hoped that there will be an adviser of agriculture who will be able to speak with knowledge on the subject. I think it is quite conceivable after the next Empire Forestry Conference—which will be sitting in 1928 in Australia—that one of the things that might emerge will be a recommendation to His Majesty's Government to have a forestry adviser attached to the Colonial Office. That is conceivable, but I only mention it because the noble Lord specifically dealt with forestry. I do not think there is any intention at the present moment of His Majesty's Government interfering by way of an increase of the Civil List or in the particular pay. The Colony concerned is undoubtedly and unquestionably as a rule the best judge of what is required. What is essential is to see on broad lines, and on questions of the highest importance, such, for example, as the questions of slavery and of defence, that the Government is continued. I regret to say that His Majesty's Government cannot accept the Amendment of the noble Lord.

LORD OLIVIER

It appears to me that the noble Lord by what he has said has demonstrated and acknowledged the unnecessary character of this part of the clause which I propose should be deleted. I will take the arguments that he put forward in the Second Reading debate in defence of this provision. His first argument was that the proviso is necessary to be made use of in times of emergency, such as the late War. He said such a provision existed in practically all Colonies, with the exception of the group with which I myself was particularly associated. Now the noble Lord tells me that it already exists in British Guiana, and that the provision is totally unnecessary in order to give that power of special legislation which the noble Lord said was only necessary in times of war. Very well, leave it alone. I think you have the power to do what you want.

LORD LOVAT

Not in anything that would touch finance.

LORD OLIVIER

I am taking the points which the noble Lord himself put forward in answer to me in the Second Reading debate. The first point he said was that it was necessary to have this power in times of emergency, such as the late War. I now gather that there is nothing in that point, and that the argument which the noble Lord gave to me with regard to these emergency matters is of no validity as justifying this clause, which is not wanted for those things. That seems to be clear. So far as military and emergency matters are concerned the clause is not wanted. Why, therefore, should it stand? The second reason which the noble Lord gave was that he might want a Civil List and a forestry officer. In the course of this debate the noble Lord has told us that all those necessities referred only to the old bad times which we are now doing away with, and that in the new Constitution we shall have a reasonable Council discussing both forestry and finance. In a Colony such as British Guiana, as in such a Colony as Jamaica, where you have capable business people with knowledge of business considerations, I can assure your lordships that under this new Constitution it will be unnecessary to have this provision. Why did the noble Lord tell me it was necessary for the purposes of a Civil List? He now admits that the purposes of a Civil List do not make it necessary. Why then retain the provision? I think the noble Lord has practically conceded my case, for he has abandoned his former arguments and has not brought forward any new ones.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 1 agreed to.

Remaining clause agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.