§ 2.43 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Gold Coast Government have published a new immigration, order, and if so, in what form, to what purport and whether copies are available in London.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF LISTOWEL)My Lords, as the Lord Privy Seal informed the House on March 17, the original Gazette notice and directive on immigration were withdrawn by the Gold Coast Government for reframing. The representations made by the interests concerned have been fully taken into account and the Gold Coast Government issued a revised directive to the immigration officer and published a revised notice in the Gazette of June 18. In the revised directive, as in the original, the Governor, in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by the immigration ordinance, directs the immigration officer as to the manner in which he is to administer the immigration regulations of the Gold Coast. The Gazette notice, like its predecessor, informs the public how the new procedure is to be operated. The changes which have been made are all in the direction of easing the immigrant's position, and the revised notice has been completely redrafted. A copy of both documents was placed in the Library of the House as soon as they had been approved.
LORD RENNELLMy Lords, were the consultations to which the noble Earl referred with commercial and industrial firms in this country, or were they held locally? On the two occasions when this matter was discussed in your Lordships' 1209 House—namely, February 15 and March 17, a suggestion was made that the interested parties in this country should be taken into consultation.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELThe discussions took place in this country between the Department and representatives of the Joint West African Committee and the Gold Coast Chamber of Mines, which were representative of the business interests concerned in the Gold Coast.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl whether the draft directive was shown, before promulgation, to those with whom the discussions had taken place, both on this side and in the Gold Coast? I ask the question because, though I agree that the noble Viscount the Leader of the House did not give any promise, he did say that in view of the particular interest displayed in Parliament about this matter the suggestion I made, that before the directive was promulgated the terms of the draft should be made known to the public, would be taken into sympatheticconsideration. May I ask—I put it in the form of a question, though I am sure the answer must be in the negative—whether that was done; and, if not, whether the draft directive was shown to anybody before promulgation in the Gold Coast?
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, I hope this reply will satisfy the noble Viscount. The business interests concerned—which I think the noble Viscount was afraid might be prejudiced in their legitimate operations by these immigration regulations—have subsequently shown that they are completely satisfied by the redrafted instructions to the immigration officer and by the notice which has appeared in the Gold Coast Gazette. The answer, technically, is that they were not consulted before the new directive was issued, but I hope the noble Viscount feels that he has now been given the substance of what he asked for on the previous occasion.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONWith the leave of the House may I put this point? The noble Earl says that business interests were consulted and that they are completely satisfied. May I remind the noble Earl that when we took this matter upstairs, the interest far transcending any others was the responsibility of the Secretary of State to Parliament and the 1210 fundamental policy of the partnership between African and British interests. When we take up the issue on the widest Imperial policy, it really is no answer to either House of Parliament to say that certain business interests were consulted and were satisfied.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONMy Lords, without notice, I have not the precise form of words which I used, but I am sure that there is every intention of carrying them out in the letter and the spirit. I understand that the firms—which were both West African and British—have indicated that they regard the revised document as satisfactory. It was published in the Gazette on June 15, so people have been aware of it for a considerable time. If there were any questions to be raised there has been time far that to be done. Copies were placed in the Library at the same time.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I do not want to raise a debate upon this matter, particularly as we are coming to another one, but as the noble Viscount the Leader of the House is always so helpful in these matters I want him to appreciate that when a grave matter of Imperial policy is raised it is not raised in the interests of any firm but as a matter of high policy. We should be grateful if those contacts which he has done so much to facilitate and to fulfil could be pursued in matters of this kind which it is our desire to take outside and above Party politics.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONI am entirely in agreement with the noble Viscount. So far as I know, it is being carried out in the spirit of my undertaking. I will make further inquiries into the matter.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONI am much obliged.