GOLD COAST LEGISLATURE

HL Deb 20 December 1944 vol 134 cc461-77

3.12 p.m.

LORD RENNELL rose to call attention to statements in the Press regarding substantial changes proposed in the Gold Coast Legislature; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, a word of explanation is perhaps necessary why the Motion which stands in my name has been left on the Order Paper in spite of the debate which took place quite recently on the Motion of the noble Viscount, Lord Elibank. The reason is that that debate covered a point more of constitutional procedure than I had in mind. It is with a view to eliciting certain information from the noble Duke that I left my Motion on the Order Paper. On October 5 the Colonial Secretary, in reply to a question in another place, stated that recommendations for constitutional reform in the Gold Coast had been submitted by the Governor and had received his approval in principle. The statement went on to say that it was proposed to grant an unofficial majority on the Legislative Council of the Gold Coast and to include on the Council representatives of Ashanti as well as of the Colony with the corresponding extension of legislative authority.

That announcement, the first of its sort in a West African Colony, involved a very substantial advance in the practice of Crown Colony administration, and as such it seemed to me at the time and since to be slightly regrettable that it passed unnoticed. That is probably due to the form adopted in making the announcement. I do not wish to suggest that the form of announcement was in any way peculiar or was not correct. I have no doubt it was correct, and indeed the noble Viscount, Lord Bennett, pointed that out in the course of the debate on Viscount Elibank's Motion. My regret is that if the announcement had to be made in that form it was not followed by some further publicity or a debate on the subject in another place. Shortly after that another announcement was made by the Colonial Secretary on similar developments in Northern Rhodesia, where an unofficial majority was also approved to be made when the necessary legislation could be enacted. That also received, except locally, very little publicity and did riot form the subject of any debate or discussion either prior to or after the event. It would appear to me, without having heard any of the grounds which led the Colonial Secretary into these two announcements, to be fair to conclude that he had some very good grounds and that it was an appropriate and proper development of our Colonial policy. It is difficult, however, to come to that conclusion without further information, which I hope the noble Duke will be able to furnish to your Lordships' House.

It is noteworthy that in both these cases —it is perhaps all the more remarkable in the case of the Gold Coast—it was found possible to approve the recommendation in principle without any public investigation in the form of a Commission or the seeking of advice from persons sent out for the purpose. That is in contrast to the procedure which has been adopted in many other cases, notably in East Africa, and more lately in regard to proposals for constitutional changes in Ceylon. It would follow from the procedure adopted in this case, I think, that all the information which was relevant to this proposal was already in the hands of the Colonial Office and that they found that the proposals which the Governor had to make were reasonable and logical and did not give rise to any difference of opinion. If that is so, it is a very happy augury for what has happened in the Gold Coast and possibly a most important development. That also is a point which the noble Duke may refer to in his reply.

One further point strikes me very forcibly. It is that, in contrast to what has happened frequently in East Africa, such opposition and antagonism as have been roused by the studies and developments of the Commission sent out have not been of a character to delay the coming into force of the changes. I think we have found in the course of the experience of twenty or thirty years that special Commissions and the publicity connected with them have led rather to delays than to improvement in the situation they found. It may not be always possible to follow this procedure in every case, but in East Africa, where there are some who think constitutional changes of the same sort are right and probably overdue, similar procedure might be followed.

If one were cynical on the subject of changes of this sort—which I am not because, as I wish to say, I am far from critical of this, indeed I think it is quite right—one might be reminded of the observation of a player at a bridge table to his rather slow-playing partner, "For goodness' sake make your mistakes quickly." I feel that in this case no mistake has been made but we are all rather in the dark about the reasons why this decision was taken. The decision is a very important one; it scarcely needs emphasizing. Not only is an unofficial majority in future to reign in the Legislative Council of the Gold Coast, but, also, the veto of the Governor has been withdrawn, and replaced with an ultimate veto of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. That this should have been enacted, or proposed, in a West African Colony is a very remarkable development, and is, I think, unlike anything that has been tried in an African Colony before. Some, no doubt, will suggest that the development is premature and, if they feel that, no doubt would have said so before now had the proposals received more publicity. But I am not one of those who think that this is premature. I feel sure that we shall all realize, after hearing what I hope the noble Duke will have to say, that it is both timely and wise.

At the same time I would urge that, in all similar cases, rather more publicity and opportunity for discussion should be provided at the time, lest we be accused, as we have been in so many quarters—among others in America—of pursuing reactionary policies with regard to our Colonies, and not paying sufficient attention to their development, either constitutional or economic. Here is a case where we have taken a very liberal and forward step. It is indeed right that everybody should know what we have done and should hear what our programme is in other cases which may be affected. I beg to move for Papers.

3.22 p.m.

LORD AMMON

My Lords, in a very few words, I desire to support the Motion which has been submitted by my noble friend Lord Rennell. In so doing, I am not saying that there has been any action that is unusual or wrong on the part of the Government because this is the manner in which; all along, Constitutions have been agreed to by Governments, and Parliament has never had an opportunity to consider them until the whole matter has been completed. I think you will see that, for many reasons, there is a mistake in that from the broadest possible angle so far as good fellowship and co-operation between the Central Government and Colonies are concerned. One of the things which used to be commented upon in the other House a good deal was lack of interest in debates dealing with our Colonial Empire. To a large extent the Government are to blame for that. Here is a matter of very great importance. It is a matter about which there is no criticism. What has been done redounds very greatly to the credit of the Colonial Office and of the Government. But it has been done in secret so that the full credit and the necessary kudos do not accrue.

Again and again one has called attention to this sort of thing in another place. It is not always so much the case that the Government do the wrong thing, but that they do the right thing in the wrong way. Because of that we are frequently unable to get the full credit for what we have done, and a good deal of misunderstanding arises both in this country and the Dominions and Colonies with regard to the matter under consideration. Thus a good deal of misunderstanding, even a good deal of feeling, occurs that need not have been engendered. I recall that, in the debate which preceded this one, the noble Viscount, Lord Cecil of Chelwood, deplored the fact that the situation which had arisen in Greece must be due to the fact that somehow or other we had failed to get the right contacts with the people concerned in that country. I think that probably the same is true with regard to many things that we have done in relation to foreign affairs and our Colonies.

On the question of the Constitution, I have but a word to say. While I congratulate the noble Duke on it—for it is a real step forward—I think that it might have gone a little further and given opportunities for training in responsibility that are lacking to a considerable extent. The result of that lack of training in responsibility now is to drive certain elements into opposition for the sake of opposition. Instead of having numbers of the people concerned trained and educated to carry the responsibility of government in the Colonies, you find that because of the lack of that training, they try to find an outlet for their energies, say, by joining in the opposition. That, I think, is one of the things which we have suffered from in the past. I am glad that the noble Lord's Motion has given us the opportunity to bring these matters forward, and I hope that the noble Duke who is in charge of this matter for the Government will at least give further consideration to the need that has been expressed. It is not that one wants to interfere with the rights of the Government or even with the rights of the Colonial Office. It is simply that one desires to bring such matters to the attention of Parliament for the double purpose of training Parliament itself in its responsibility to the Empire and of helping us all to take a fuller interest in these matters than has been taken hitherto.

3.28 p.m.

LORD HAILEY

My Lords, if I join in this debate it is partly because I desire to do something to remove an impression that seems to have arisen that when Colonial issues are being debated in Parliament insufficient interest is taken in them. Lord Rennell framed his Motion largely in connexion with the procedure adopted in the step recently taken by the Colonial Secretary. I shall not, myself, deal further with that question of procedure. I am sure there must be many who feel, as I do, that an important step of this kind should receive its due dramatic importance, both for the sake of the Colonies and for the sake of our reputation in the outside world. But there are some important underlying questions which go beyond the question of procedure. There is for instance the whole question of whether any Colony should receive the concession of the unofficial majority in its Legislature, and the time at which it should receive it. That is a problem of great importance.

Indeed I may say with some justice that probably hardly any issue in the discussions of political development in the Colonies is more debatable that this. It is quite clear that until you have a system in which you can get adequate representation of all interests, and develop a Party system which enables the Executive Government to base itself firmly on the, votes of the majority Party, until you arrive at that stage, a Government must have some way of securing necessary and essential legislation. That is not only required, of course, to maintain its executive position and to secure finance and the like, but essential in order that it may prevent legislation in sectional interests. Those sectional interests may arise, for instance, in East Africa by the fact that it is only a European settled community which has representation. They may arise in West Africa by the fact that such representation as is given in the Legislature is confined to interests represented by the Chiefs and to a certain advanced section of the urban population. Again they may arise, as in the West Indies, because political power is largely in the hands of one or other of the colour strata into which most of those islands are divided.

I remember that in the 'sixties the then Colonial Secretary, when a question arose with regard to the attitude of the Imperial Government towards certain of the older settled Colonies in the West Indies, said he would rather that the Imperial Government ceased to have any connexion with them—I think that the words that he actually used were somewhat impolite; he said he preferred to give them independence and let them go to the devil in their own way—than that the Imperial Government should undertake any responsibility for those islands unless it had the power to secure the necessary legislation. Hitherto we have secured this by two devices, the first being the official majority and the second the reservation of powers in the hands of the Governor. The benefit of the, official majority, of course, is that you can secure legislation in the exact form in which you desire it; you must be responsive to the minority—that goes without saying—but you can by this means secure a balanced decision and prevent any invasion of the interests of the large portion of the population which is not duly represented. The advantage of the second system—that of the unofficial majority with reserve powers in the hands of the Governor—is that it is a substantial advance on the path to self-government. Your Lordships will perhaps recollect that the Joint Select Committee of Parliament which was concerned with East Africa said that the grant of a nonofficial majority almost amounted to responsible government. That was overstating the case, but it is certainly a step forward in the grant of self-government.

Both these systems, however, have their difficulties. The difficulty of the official majority is that you may provoke your minority into being a standing opposition, with all the irresponsibility in debate which naturally follows. The difficulty of the system of reserve powers is actually in its exercise. You incur charges that the concession towards self-government is only a pretence. You have all the irritation which results when these powers are exercised, and you may have, at the same time, the administrative disadvantage of hesitation to exercise them when their exercise is really required. If I may venture a conclusion on this somewhat abstract discussion, it is that the choice between these two methods must depend very much on the stage of political development at which a Colony has arrived. If you can be sure that you have a state of things where there is a fairly adequate representation, and when you need exercise these powers only on very exceptional occasions, by all means have an unofficial majority; but otherwise it is probably wiser to retain the system which prevails in so many Colonies, of an official majority. Hitherto, as the noble Lord has pointed out, the system in Africa has been one of official majorities, and this is the first breach in that system. You do not escape difficulty either way. Difficulty must inevitably arise in the difficult process of transition from an official to a popular form of government, a process which is as fraught with difficulties to the administrator as it is frequently irritating to the Colonial people concerned.

I said that there were some other fundamental questions which arose as a result of this movement. I would remind your Lordships that the Gold Coast really consists of three parts. I shall not go into a long geographical excursion, but I would point out that the Northern Territories are still in a somewhat undeveloped state and still only a Protectorate, and are divided from the rest of the territory by lack of good means of communication. There is largely a subsistence economy, and their social and political circumstances are similar to those of some of the more primitive parts of Africa. Then you have Ashanti, which, owing to a long war tradition, has a certain identity of its own. It is homogeneous in composition. From the political point of view its own attention has been largely centred on the con- federation which formerly ruled it, and whose credit has been revived by us. It has hitherto seemed to have very little interest in political association with the Gold Coast Colony itself. It has never hitherto sought representation in the Legislature; the Governor has legislated for Ashanti on his own authority.

Finally, we have the Gold Coast, which is by no means homogeneous in its composition. It is in the hands of a very large number of different native authorities, and consists of at least two strongly divided linguistic groups. It has on the other hand this difference from the rest of the territory, that it has a far more advanced economic status, owing to the rapid growth of the cocoa trade, and as a consequence it has a growing moneyed middle-class, a middle-class which is not only concerned in commerce but also largely occupied in legal and journalistic occupations, with the result that it has a considerably more advanced political development than is to be found in many parts of Africa. As a result of some of the historical circumstances under which our jurisdiction has extended in the Gold Coast, the nature of that jurisdiction has varied a good deal from that in many other parts of Africa. Again I shall not attempt a long excursion, but the fact is that whereas elsewhere in Africa we assumed an extent of control which is fairly complete in itself, control which seemed to be derived in some circumstances from the tradition of conquest or from the making of agreements which gave us complete authority, that has not been the position hitherto in the Gold Coast.

We have treated the native authorities there on a different basis. There has grown up a tradition, indeed, that they possess some inherent powers of their own, so much so that we exercised no control over the manner in which they used the moneys which they raised within their own communities, and we exercised little control over their use of powers of justice. Again, it was held at one time—and they themselves have always made the claim—that they held those inherent powers independent of the Crown. Now that position has been altered to some extent in recent years owing to the growing pressure on the Administration of the Gold Coast to adopt systems like the system of indirect rule which have been prevalent in other parts of Africa. But the result nevertheless has been that, though the Gold Coast made great progress in many of its headquarters institutions, educational, medical and the like, yet far less has undoubtedly been done throughout the length and breadth of the country in the way of essential social services than you would find in some of the neighbouring and more distant Colonial territories. There has been a very unequal distribution of all the benefits which might have accrued to the Colony from the large resources it has obtained from the cocoa trade. Now many observers have noted this, and it is not unnatural that they should have thought that the primary requirement in the Gold Coast was an administrative reform which would mean a more equal distribution of these services to which I have referred and far greater attention to the needs of the administration of justice.

They recognized, of course, the strength of the growth of political interest in the Gold Coast itself, and they were very far indeed from desiring to deny that interest full opportunity of expressing itself, or indeed of taking a part in the management and government of the affairs of the Colony. But they saw these two difficulties. They saw that the territory as a whole did not consist of a single unit, as I have explained, and that many parts of it had an interest rather in maintaining their own identity than in joining in any common government; and they saw also that there was a difficulty in the basic social constitution of the territory. In consequence their thoughts took the form that what was immediately required, apart from the administrative reforms to which I have referred, was, on the political side, a building up of institutions from below instead of from above on a basis that would give a wider training in political responsibilities, and eventually give a more unified form to the government of the Colony. They would therefore have had separate Councils in the three different territories, united in a small Council dealing with the common interests; they would have reorganized the native authority system so as to make it a better medium for representative purposes, instead of representing, as it does at the moment, certain sectional interests; and they would have fostered local self-governing institutions in urban areas and the like.

Well, there you have the dilemma—the choice between two systems of advance. It does not represent two opposite philosophies, for both, I think, are united in a very genuine desire to secure the political evolution of the territory. It is a difference of method rather than of principle. We have passed beyond that stage when we think it safe to give lip-service to the cause of advance in self-government in Colonies—lip-service because we might have hoped that it was our successors who would have to meet the implications of any such measures. That was a dangerous stage. A dangerous stage it has proved both in India and in the Colonies, and has led to charges of bad faith, much disappointment and sometimes to ill-considered changes in the Constitution in order to prevent disappointments of that nature.

Nevertheless I think we are all agreed that, although self-government we must have, and self-government as rapidly as it is reasonable to attain it, yet it must be a reality. It must not merely satisfy the claims of those who see advance in a rapid approach to the Parliamentary institutions which we follow here, but it must be something more than that. It must be based on the solid ground of social and economic advance, which will give the foundations on which self-government can rest. And it must secure at the same time a form of representation based on the widest possible range of informed and instructed opinion, and opinion which in itself has had the advantage of some training in political responsibilities. Now apart from what I have said about the present step, I do not think the present step is momentous in itself, but it might prove to be so if it should lead to an undue absorption in political advance at the expense of securing reforms in the administrative system and in the attainment of a more solid and dependable basis of representation. I join with the noble Lord, Lord Rennell, in wishing the happiest augury for the future of this move; yet I feel that it is one which places on the Colonial Office a great responsibility for watching to see that it does not lead to that undue absorption in purely political advance. It lays on the Colonial Office the burden of taking steps, even at the risk of some disappointment to the more ambitious of the political elements in the Colony, to secure that the advance made is not merely in political reforms, but is really an advance which we can say represents orderly and constructive progress throughout the territory.

3.48 p.m.

VISCOUNT BLEDISLOE

My Lords, I had not intended to take any part in this debate, and I should not have dreamed of doing so but for the fact that my noble friend Lord Rennell, in his able and, if I may say so, restrained speech on this Motion, had not referred to Northern Rhodesia. For, as your Lordships know, I was Chairman of a Royal Commission which no less than six years ago went to Northern Rhodesia, in fact to both Rhodesias and Nyasaland, and reported on the problem as to whether there should not be a closer association among those three territories. I may say at once that I rejoice in the fact that, so far as Northern Rhodesia is concerned, there has been a strengthening of the nonofficial element on the Legislative Council of that Protectorate. What I do want to emphasize—and I think my noble friend Lord Rennell referred to it—is the enormous importance, when His Majesty's Government have come to the conclusion that this important element should be strengthened, of not delaying to carry out their decision as soon as possible. There is an excellent motto which in this connexion I think it is well to act upon: Bis dat qui cito dat—"He gives twice who gives quickly."

As regards Northern Rhodesia, as I am sure the noble Duke will know, there has been for many years past a growing sense of unrest both among the European population and among the native population, largely in consequence of their having no effective voice in the government or the administration of that Protectorate. When my Royal Commission reported to His Majesty's Government, we made it perfectly clear that we felt strongly that there should be some strengthening of that unofficial element. And for this reason: that in its absence there was a growing feeling of irresponsibility on the part both of the European population and of the native population. We felt very strongly that if you want to engender a greater sense of responsibility, if you want indeed to promote the process of evolution towards responsible government, there is no factor that would stimulate that to a greater extent than giving unofficial representation to a much larger extent on both the Legislative and the Executive Councils. We found there was, in fact, a prevalent criticism throughout the whole of that large territory—which, by the way, was very backward indeed in the matter of all social services —that the Protectorate was being tied to the apron-strings of Whitehall to far too great an extent.

I want to emphasize this in conclusion: that I came forcibly to the conclusion myself that if you want to promote a fuller development of social services of every kind in those very primitive communities, it is most essential to make both the native element and the European element conscious that theirs is the initial responsibility. If they do not begin to develop a sense of responsibility, and not a feeling of frustration because they have no voice in the affairs of their country, then they are not advancing as rapidly as they should towards that goal which we all hope will be reached in the case of all the Dependencies and Protectorates of this Empire—namely, the ultimate goal of responsible government.

3.53 P.m.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE)

My Lords, I feel very much in the debt of the noble Lord who moved, for affording me this opportunity of giving your Lordships some account of the changes proposed in the Constitution of the Gold Coast. The noble Lord asked why these changes were being made at this particular time, and I think before I detail the changes I might perhaps explain that point. These changes had been very much mooted even before the war. As the noble Lord knows, there are in the Gold Coast many highly-educated Africans who felt—and I think felt reasonably and justifiably—that the time had come when they should make some advance towards self-governing institutions. Then, with the war raging in Africa and West Africa playing a very important part in the war effort, attention tended to be distracted from constitutional changes, and they rather went into the background. The war has now somewhat receded from Africa, and the present Governor felt the time had come when these changes should be made. I do not say that there was agitation, but the feeling which was there before the war was beginning to revive, and the Governor felt strongly that the moment had come when changes which, if not overdue were certainly due, should be made. That is the why and the where-for of the changes at the present time.

As the noble Lord, Lord Hailey, mentioned in his speech, the Gold Coast is a complicated Colony. It is by no means homogeneous and its Constitution is very far from a simple one. For the benefit of those of your Lordships who have not made a close study of Gold Coast affairs, I might perhaps begin by explaining the present Constitution, because without having some grasp of that the changes are almost meaningless. The present Constitution provides for a Council consisting of the Governor as President, with an original and casting vote, five ex-officio members of the Executive Council, ten nominated official members, six provincial members chosen by the three Provincial Councils in the Colony, three municipal members, elected by ballot for Accra, Sekondi, and Cape Coast, and five European unofficial members. Your Lordships will observe that under this Constitution there is an official majority.

Recommendations for constitutional reform have, as I say, recently been submitted to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State by the Governor, after full consultation with representatives of African political opinion, and those proposals have received my right honourable friend's approval in principle. It is proposed to grant an unofficial majority on the Legislative Council, and to include on the Council representatives of Ashanti as well as of the Colony, with a corresponding extension of its legislative authority. Under the new proposals the Legislative Council will consist of the Governor as President, but without a vote, and of six official members, including the Chief Commissioners of Ashanti and the Northern Territories, nine provincial members for the Colony, which would be divided into two provinces, Eastern and Western, instead of three as at present, and these members, of whom five would be drawn from the Eastern Province and four from the Western, would be elected by the Joint Provincial Council; then four members for Ashanti, who would be elected by the Ashanti Confederacy Council, five municipal members—namely, two for Accra and one each for Cape Coast, Sekondi-Takoradi and Kumasi—who would be elected by ballot, and six nominated members who would be appointed by the Governor. In addition, the Governor would have power to appoint extraordinary members who would not be entitled to vote.

The Governor would be granted reserve powers. I did not follow the noble Lord about that point. He seemed to think there had been some substantial change or some novelty in the Governor's powers, which in fact remain substantially, though not exactly, as they were. There is nothing new in the Governor's powers, which follow the existing practice in such places as Trinidad. The Governor would be granted reserve powers which would permit him to override a decision of the Legislative Council in the interests of public order, public faith or good government. Any such action by the Governor would be subject to revocation by the Secretary of State, except in the case of a Bill, which would be subject to disallowance by His Majesty.

Your Lordships will notice that the result of these proposed changes is that an official majority will be changed into a substantial unofficial majority. Lord Ammon expressed some little regret that we had not gone further and gone as far as giving responsibility. He put his hand there on a very delicate spot because there is the real difficulty in this process of growth that members of Assemblies are perhaps almost inevitably driven into opposition. I can only say in answer to what has been said in the debate that one can go too far at one bound, but I believe this will be an important and valuable step in the process of educating towards fuller responsibility. It is hoped that this new Constitution will come into operation in the course of the next year—1945. But the Northern Territories will not come under the authority of the Legislative Council until their unofficial representation on it is possible, and for the present the Governor will continue to legislate for them.

I do not want to exaggerate the importance of these changes, nor do I claim for them that they will achieve anything like a complete democracy or self-government for the Gold Coast, but they do represent a real step forward towards constitutional development and I think they can fairly be described as a rung in the ladder of progress. From the political point of view the significance of according an unofficial African majority is that out of eighteen elected unofficial Africans, thirteen will be elected by the Joint Provincial Council of the Ashanti Confederacy Council and consequently will represent what might perhaps be called the more traditional opinion in Africa. The municipal members are to be elected on lines roughly resembling those obtaining here, while the provincial members will be elected on predominantly African lines. But this does not necessarily mean that the thirteen representatives drawn horn tribal sources and elected in accordance with African methods will be undemocratic or reactionary in their outlook.

I should perhaps explain that the system of election by the Provincial Council —which your Lordships will know consists of the Head Chiefs whose headquarters are situated within the Province—is that each member of a Provincial Council has one vote for every unit of 10,000 inhabitants in his division, but the members of these Councils are by no means so authoritarian as they may sound. These Chiefs are in fact very sensitive to African public opinion within their own States and are liable to be "de-stooled" if they pursue a policy which is sufficiently unpopular among their own people. think it may therefore be expected that their influence in the Legislative Council, while to some extent based on tradition, will nevertheless closely reflect popular opinion in their own States.

Several of your Lordships have said that these proposals are open to criticism both from the Left and from the Right. There may be those who consider that they go farther than is prudent and others who consider that they do not go far enough. I can only say that the Governor who has been at great pains to consult African opinion in the Colony, and my right honourable friend, have given very much time and thought to the proposals. Constitutional matters were discussed when my right honourable friend visited the Colony not long ago and were discussed at great length when the Governor was at home in the early part of this year. It is a complex problem. We are dealing with a Colony which is changing and developing very rapidly, and whose population is far from homogeneous. You have on the one hand a large number of Africans who still live under tribal conditions, and on the other there is a relatively small but influential section of highly-educated Africans whose outlook is tending to become European rather than African. To some these reforms may seem to be inadequate, but we have to consider the Colony as a whole, and I think I may fairly claim for the proposed reforms that they do represent a real and substantial step forward, that they will give the Colony the opportunity of educating itself in the art of self-government, and that they represent not finality but progress towards the ultimate goal.

4.6 p.m.

LORD RENNELL

My Lords, before the debate is closed there is one point in the noble Duke's reply which is not quite clear to me. I do not know if he is in a position to answer it. He referred to the extraordinary members who might be nominated up to the number, I think, of five or six but who would not have a vote. Could the noble Duke say what the purpose of these representatives would be? Is it intended that they should represent European interests or African interests?

THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE

I think the Governor has a very wide discretion. They may be either Africans or Europeans. The idea of bringing them in is due to the fairly substantial and far-reaching schemes of Colonial development that are under consideration at the present time. The idea is that when technical advice is required in the Assembly it will be desirable that there should be people in the Assembly who are in a position to inform it with regard to the merits of the schemes put before it. They will not have a. vote but they will be in a position to give information and advice on technical matters to the Assembly.

LORD FARINGDON

Is it in the mind of the Government that the Governor should appoint to his Executive Council any of the elected members of the new Legislature? I apologize for being late at the discussion. I was detained. If the noble Duke has not the answer perhaps he can tell me on another occasion.

LORD RENNELL

My Lords, I thank the noble Duke for his reply to my second question. It is, as I suspected, for the purpose of obtaining advice, either European or African, that provision is being made for these non-voting members. I also thank the noble Duke for his very interesting explanation of the reasons for, and possible effect of, the changes that are proposed. I hope that, as approval has been given in principle, not too much delay will be allowed to take place before the proposals are carried into effect lest we be accused of deliberate procrastination and therefore of a lack of good faith. The noble Duke has said he does not think these proposals represent a fundamental change. I think he is underestimating what has been done. I think they represent a very great step and one which has not taken place elsewhere in Africa. With the permission of the House I propose to withdraw the Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.