HL Deb 03 July 1946 vol 142 cc115-26

4.2 p.m.

The EARL OF CORK AND ORRERY rose to ask His Majesty's Government on what grounds the time-honoured precedent of appointing an officer of the Fighting Services to the Governorship of Malta has now been departed from; and to move for Papers. The noble Earl said: My Lords, in introducing the Motion which stands in my name, I wish to disclaim any intention of making a personal attack upon the honourable gentleman who has been appointed Governor of Malta. I have not the pleasure of his acquaintance, but I wish him, as I am sure everyone else in your Lordships' House does, the greatest success in his important office. My criticism of the appointment is based upon the belief that this break with the custom of appointing a distinguished soldier to the Governorship of Malta is to be deplored and that it is a grave mistake and one which has been made at a most inopportune time.

I have alluded in my Motion to the "time-honoured precedent" of a military man holding this appointment. I have not the least doubt that I shall be told in reply that civilians have held this appointment. That may be so, but when I tell your Lordships that for the last sixty years a long succession of distinguished soldiers have held this Governorship, I think your Lordships will agree with me that a custom has been established. It is not my intention to argue that because Malta has had a long line of military Governors in the past, a civilian should never be appointed. On the contrary, I believe a change might be salutary at times. But when a radical change of this sort is made, I contend that the reason should be manifest; otherwise it casts a reflection upon the system that has preceded it. In this case the reason is far from manifest. A study of the present nominee's record shows that outside his professional life as a solicitor he has followed a career of useful public service which does him credit, but it is a record which, with all due respect, could be equalled by hundreds of people up and down the country, and it affords no possible evidence that he is qualified to become the Governor of a politically turbulent Colony, or to command a fortress, or deal with those special new problems which we are told have arisen. I might remind your Lordships that the civil side of the administration of Malta has always been well looked after by a distinguished line of Lieutenant Governors and Chief Secretaries who have been appointed for that particular purpose.

The Maltese, as is natural with most Mediterranean races, take their politics very seriously. Political crises have been common and have followed one another in quick succession, ever since Malta, by her own choice and at her own request, was admitted over 130 years ago to membership of the British Empire. There are three distinct interests to be co-ordinated and they play an important part in the life of the island. There is the civil population, divided, as many civil populations are, into two or three Parties. There is an all-powerful Church, which is naturally inclined to look towards Rome. There are the Services—the Army and the Royal Air Force. There is also the large dockyard, and the establishments connected with these Services, upon which a large proportion of the population of Malta depends for its living. There is, or used to be, a section of opinion which looked to Italy rather than to Britain as their spiritual home. When Mussolini was at the height of his power there was quite a strong Fascist movement in Malta. Black-shirts were to be seen walking about the streets of Valetta. It was largely due to the persistent efforts of Lord Strickland, who was Chief Secretary and afterwards Prime Minister, that Italian propaganda was defeated. I think Lord Strickland never received the credit which was his due for his services in that respect. But all those questions were successfully dealt with.

Fundamentally the Maltese have never wavered in their self-imposed allegiance to the British Crown, a fact which was clearly shown in the recent war, when, under the leadership of two gallant military Governors, they set an example of courage and fortitude to the whole world. Surely, with all these mixed and conflicting interests in this very congested island, it is much better to have at the head of affairs a man who has never been connected with politics but who has a wide experience of men and matters rather than an unknown politician recommended by a Government partly, at least, for political reasons. The very fact that he has been recommended for political reasons might well arouse prejudice in a certain section of the population because they may not share the views of the British Government of the day.

Nor can the new Governor in this case claim a background which would have given him a wide knowledge of world affairs. His career rather has been one of a very parochial nature, inclined to foster a limited outlook, both politically and in general. Are we really asked to believe that not one among the Generals, Admirals and Air-Marshals can be found to fill this appointment, and that, failing them, there is no one trained in the professional Colonial Service who is fit to take it up? Answering a question in another place, the Secretary of State for the Colonies used these words: I am not casting any disparaging reflections upon any members of the three Services, but there are many problems with which Malta is confronted at the present time to deal with which it was regarded as necessary to have a civilian Governor.

It is only the restraint which is imposed upon me by your Lordships' House that prevents my expressing my opinion of that assertion in two words. My contention is that this appointment, while it may not cast disparaging reflections upon any individual members of the three Fighting Services, does cast disparaging reflections on the very large body of senior officers of all three Services, as well as on persons trained in the Colonial Service. I do not know how many of your Lordships are well acquainted with Malta, but those of you who are will know that conditions there have at times been turbulent. It would be interesting to know who gave the Government the advice to make this appointment, and what qualifications that individual had for doing so.

Why does the Government choose this particular moment to discredit military officers? I use the term "military" in its widest sense. Why, if a change had to be made, could not someone who had the necessary administrative experience be selected from among the many first-class men in the country who are waiting for something to do? Why could not some such individual be selected to deal with those problems with which no one in the military services or the Colonial Service is deemed fit to cope? Why should the Government choose this particular moment to deprive the Services of what has in the past been regarded as an appointment legitimately looked upon as open to senior officers? God knows, the treatment of our war leaders by the present Government has not been particularly generous. The Peerages awarded to soldiers in this war have been of lower rank and not so numerous as those awarded for similar services in the 1914–1918 war. No baronetcies have been given this time for military services as were given on the last occasion. It is said that the Government disapprove of this particular form of recognition of such services. Perhaps they do. If so, they were going against their principles in creating a baronet the other day. No monetary award has been granted. It used to be said that for such officers there was personal honour and glory. Recognition must be given to them not for what they will do, but for what they have done, and if you do not give them money their services should be recognized in some other tangible form.

I think my noble friend Lord Croft recently made a good suggestion, namely, that the most prominent of our war leaders, instead of being put upon half-pay directly they finish their present appointments, should be allowed to carry on full pay, as in America and in Russia, until the end of their lives. But the Treasury obviously did not like this. The Treasury have gone one better. They have prevented these senior officers from receiving any benefit at all in the recent readjustments in respect of taxation on earned income.

Let me remind your Lordships of the lines: Our sailors and soldiers we adore In times of danger, not before. The danger past, both are requited: The soldier is forgotten, and the sailor slighted. You are running true to form. It has always been so. The only difference is that in this case you have started rather earlier than usual. You have slighted the whole of the senior officers of the three Services and of the Colonial Service in order to satisfy the claims of a political supporter who, however worthy, is quite untried and unknown. I beg to move for Papers.

4.11 p.m.

LORD FARINGDON

My Lords, I think it is always enlivening to listen to the noble Earl and I find myself on occasions wholly in agreement with him, more particularly on Service matters. I therefore regret the more that on this occasion I really cannot wholly follow his arguments. A great many of the arguments he put forward seem to me to be really against his own case. He gave a description of the situation in Malta with which I am quite certain no one who knows the island would disagree, but that description seemed to me to be further support for the kind of appointment which he is at the moment criticizing. That a military officer has in the past generally been appointed as Governor of Malta is due to historical circumstances. When we acquired Malta, we acquired it as a military station. But the time when we were able to treat it as a military station, and to more or less ignore the inhabitants, their views and their wishes, has passed.

I suggest that a good many of the troubles which the noble Earl referred to have been due to that tendency to treat Malta as a military station rather than as a Colony and, I would remind your Lordships, a Colony inhabited not by backward people but by an extremely lively European people. It is one of the big problems of the present time in our Colonial Empire to find suitable Governors for those Colonies which are approaching political maturity. The noble Earl has said that in his view a military appointment would have been politically neutral and, therefore, desirable in a country which is becoming very much alive politically. I think the noble Lord is mistaken. He suggested that when the new Governor happens to belong to a political Party in England his politics should not be unacceptable in Malta. I would remind the House that Lord Strickland, of whom he spoke so highly, was also in the Labour Party.

THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERY

I did not speak against any Party at all; I spoke in general terms.

LORD FARINGDON

I am not suggesting that the noble Earl spoke against a Party. What the noble Earl said was that the political background of the new Governor might be unacceptable to certain elements in Malta. I think that was an unfortunate suggestion, if I may say so. I think at least we in this House should assume that any Governor who is appointed will act properly as a Governor and will not show political prejudice. As I was saving, our big problem nowadays is to find a suitable type of Governor for the Colonies which are developing to political maturity. It is not an easy problem in the Colonial Service itself. Unfortunately we have had many instances where Colonial Service Governors used to dealing with backward people have found themselves out of tune in Colonies which are more advanced. I suggest that the only form of Governor who is really likely to be successful is a Governor who has had, here in England, the home of democratic politics, political experience.

I think the noble Earl was a little unfair in the light way in which he dealt with the present Governor's qualifications. He had a distinguished career on the London County Council, where he was chairman of the finance committee. I would have thought for a Colony like Malta, which is hardly more than a municipality, and indeed whose population is less that that of London, the experience of a new Governor as a politician, and as a politician dealing at close quarters with an area like that of the London County Council, would be likely to produce the sort of Governor who would understand the political development of the island, bring it forward and guide it in the way it should go. This is an example of one of the difficult problems we have in our Colonial Empire, and in this case I feel that His Majesty's Government have made a very wise departure which we should all watch with a careful eye.

4.16 p.m.

LORD CROFT

My Lords, I only intervene for a short space of time to say that I most cordially agree with the apprehension expressed by the noble Earl in moving his Motion. This problem which we are considering to-day does not seem to me to be one so much of personalities. I am sure the Governor who has been chosen by His Majesty's Government from amongst all their followers is regarded by them as one who will exercise the duties of Governor to the best of his ability, and I am sure he will do everything in his power to carry out the traditions of Governors in whatever part of the Empire to which they may be sent. But here we are dealing with a case where, for no reason that has become apparent and for which there has been no justification that I have seen, there is a complete departure from precedent. Have we any reason to think that the people of Malta were dissatisfied that the Government of this country always chose one of its greatest military leaders in order to uphold that position? Did they ever regard this as anything but a great honour to that Colony?

When the noble Lord who has just sat down speaks of the fact that the new Governor must not be out of tune with the people of Malta, I venture to think that if you asked any of the Maltese you would be told that Lord Gort was never out of tune. The whole population regarded him as a wonderful exemplar of chivalry and leadership in every respect, and he carried out the finest traditions in the deliberate sacrifices he made of his personal comfort in order to be with them. And has there been any criticism of previous Governors of Malta which is suggested by this change? I venture to think not. Taking the whole map of the world, with all the changes of strategic outlook, there is no place to-day, I venture to suggest, with the possible exception of Gibraltar, which can be regarded as more vital as a fortress to the whole of our communications and the whole of our prestige. I therefore feel it really is deplorable that Malta should have been selected. What has Malta done to deserve this great change? After all, the history, of Malta is a glowing one. We all feel that amongst al the people of countries which are inhabited by our fellow-subjects, the Maltese have risen to the greatest heights.

I should have thought this was a case where we should have endeavoured to select someone whose name is ringing through the land and through all the Dominions overseas as one of those who saved this country by their leadership in the great struggle through which we have recently passed. The noble Lord says you really want a man of political experience. I am sure the gentleman who has been appointed has got political experience, but I had been a very long time in the House of Commons before I was forcibly ejected, and I must confess I do not remember that he was a very great and well-known politician in the Labour Party. Be that as it may, I think what we do want the people in the Dominions and Colonies overseas to realize is that we aim, as far as possible, in all these Governorships to keep them detached from any political point of view in this country, and I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Cork, to that extent.

The noble Earl must have touched a responsive note in all your Lordships' minds, I think, when he referred to the fact that these are the very few appointments which you can give for crowning the career of a man who has given great service in the Fighting Forces. But His Majesty's Government, in violation of all precedent, decided that there should be no sort of recompense for the men who led us so brilliantly, and Admirals of the Fleet, Field-Marshals and Air-Marshals who had covered themselves with glory and who had done so much in the way of saving life (which is perhaps the greatest tribute we can pay them) in the last war, were, when they had finished that great service, treated in precisely the same as an Admiral of the Fleet, a Field-Marshal or an Air-Marshal in times of -peace. I believe the whole nation feels that a wrong was done there.

There are, however, four or five posts in which these men can render a last great act of service. If anyone imagines that these great leaders of the Fighting Forces have no experience in administration and have not shown the greatest qualities of diplomacy and tact in the positions they have reached in their Services, I venture to think he has not studied their careers very carefully. I hope the Government will give us at any rate better reasons than we have yet had presented to us, not as to why X, Y or Z was appointed but as to why there has been this departure from precedent and why we should not have taken steps to endeavour to see that these great men, whose names are in all our minds, should receive these appointments where they could once more place their great experience at the service of their countrymen.

4.23 p.m.

LORD AMMON

My Lords, I have, as we all do, listened with more than interest to one of those breezy interludes which we expect when the noble and gallant Earl addresses the House, but I think that in some of his remarks he did himself a little less than justice. This appointment is not made (and I trust no appointments are made) on political grounds; it is made on merit. The present appointment does not cast the slightest reflection on any of the gallant gentlemen who have formerly held this office, and indeed the noble and gallant Earl himself said he could conceive that there might be a change of circumstances which would lead to a departure from the hitherto accepted practice. Might I point out to him that he has been a little less than just to the Government on the question of the appointments of this rank that they have made? As a matter of fact, all the very important appointments of this nature which have been made have been given to officers of the Fighting Services. Let me remind the noble Earl that Field-Marshal Alexander has been appointed as Governor-General of Canada, that a very gallant general has been appointed as Governor of Madras, and that the gallant general, General Freyburg, has been appointed as Governor-General of New Zealand.

LORD CROFT

Is it not correct to say that those appointments in the Dominions to which the noble Lord has referred are made after consultation with the Governments of the Dominions concerned?

LORD AMMON

Naturally, and I do not think it can be assumed that there is not also consultation with the people of Malta. I also think the noble Lord, Lord Croft, did not do himself justice when he suggested that this appointment was a criticism of past holders of the office. It is nothing of the sort. I am sure nobody is more ready than my colleagues in the Government to pay their tribute to those who served in those offices in times gone by, but I very much object to the view being held that appointments to these positions should be made as rewards for service in some particular arm of the Services. The Government must have regard to the duties which the holders of the offices are to discharge and to the peoples over whom they are going to rule for the time being.

Having said that, I hope and believe that I shall convince the noble Earl that there are adequate reasons why this step should be taken, and in that connexion may I say a word about the present Governor, whom I have known for many years. It does not always happen that the people with great administrative ability and those who do important work in the public service are those who loom largely in the discussions in either House of Parliament. They can, as Mr. Douglas has done, render much public service in other spheres. Mr. Douglas (a professional gentleman of standing) has been chairman of the finance committee of the London County Council for many years. Might I remind your Lordships that that has a clientêle of something over 8,000,000 people—several times larger than the population of Malta. He has served in a position of great responsibility and has earned the approval not only of the County Council itself but of the public outside by the way he has managed the Council's finances. His reputation was such that when he entered the other place he was appointed Chairman of the Estimates Committee, and he has, therefore, wide experience of financial questions in the field of both central and local government. I say that having regard to the somewhat, shall I say, oblique criticism that has been made of the gentleman who has been appointed.

The question of the appointment of a civilian to the Governorship of Malta has been under discussion at various times for many years in view of the growing complexity of the constitutional and administrative questions arising in the island. This has been accentuated by the change from war to peace conditions and the local administration is now confronted with acutely pressing problems connected with constitutional changes and financial and economic adjustment. To deal with those conditions it was felt to be in the best interests of the Maltese people to appoint a Governor with experience in the field of civil government and it is on those grounds that His Majesty's Government have based themselves in making the recent change. The circumstances now are altogether different from those which prevailed when one looked upon Malta chiefly as a fortress and there is not the slightest reflection on those gallant gentlemen who have filled this position in days gone by or on others who are still in the Services. I hope that your Lordships will see that this is a wise departure to meet the change in circumstances which has occurred in the island. I am not unfamiliar with the island myself. I went there on many occasions when I was at the Admiralty and came into touch with many of its people in many ways. From what I know of them, I do not imagine that this will be an unwelcome appointment.

4.29 p.m.

THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERY

My Lords, a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. After listening to the very eloquent remarks from the Government Benches, I must say that I do not think any of them are really valid. The noble Lord, Lord Faringdon, agreed with me I thought to a certain extent in that you ought to have somebody above a politician for this position. When I say that, I hope nobody in this House will think I am casting any slurs on politicians, because I can think of several politicians with very distinguished records who would make excellent Governors. I do not think you want the Governor of any Colony to go into details, because he has got his staff to do that. The worst Commander-in-Chief that exists is the man who will try to deal with every detail and who will not trust to the men he has got around him. I am perfectly sure that that is true in the case of the Governor of a Colony such as Malta.

What are these new problems? They have been boiling up for some time. There have been political problems in Malta ever since 1814, I think it was, when we took the island over. They have always been present; there is very little new. They come in cycles like the troubles in the history of this country; the same problems come up time after time. Military men have been talked about in glowing terms—many words have been used to say what wonderful men our leaders are—but when it comes to dealing with them in a tangible fashion, they are neglected and slurred. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

4.30 p.m.