§ 3.21 p.m.
§ Order of the Day for the House to be again in Committee read.
§ Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ House in Committee accordingly.
§ [The EARL OF DROGHEDA in the Chair]
§ Clause 156 [Special defence available to mine under-managers with limited jurisdiction]:
§ THE PAYMASTER GENERAL (THE EARL OF SELKIRK)This is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 93, line 29, leave out ("a contravention of any such provision or notice") and insert ("such a contravention").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 156, as amended, agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRK moved, after Clause 156, to insert the following new clause:
§ Liability of owners for breaches of statutory duty by their servants
§ ". For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the owner of a mine or quarry is not absolved from liability to pay damages in respect of a contravention, in relation to the mine or quarry, by a person employed by him of—
- (a) a provision of this Act of an order made thereunder or of regulations; or
- (b) a prohibition, restriction or requirement imposed by a notice served under or by virtue of this Act by an inspector;
§ The noble Earl said: This new clause is set down to remove a doubt which arises from the reservation of opinion expressed in two cases heard in this House. The question was whether a master is responsible for the negligence of his servant arising front a breach of statutory duty expressly laid upon the servant—in other words, whether the maxim respondiat superior applies in regard to a breach of statutory duty as it undoubtedly does in respect of negligence under Common Law. The purpose of the Amendment is to put the matter beyond doubt and to say that the master is responsible for a breach of statutory duty expressly laid on his servant. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 156, insert the said new clause.—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 157 [Penalisation of supply of defective equipment for mines and quarries]:
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRK moved to leave out Clause 157. The noble Earl said: We have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this clause, in the way in which it is drawn, will not work. As drawn, the clause makes it an offence to supply equipment which would contravene the requirements under this Bill if the maker knew that it was for use in a mine or quarry in this country. We have been forced to the conclusion that that proposal is unworkable, for various reasons. One is that every maker would require to know what rules and what exemptions were in force in any mine to which he was supplying equipment—and I would emphasise that he has to supply equipment not only according to the provisions of the Act (as it will be) but also according to any instruction or exemption laid on the inspectors by virtue of this Act. We think that is unenforceable.
§ There are other difficulties. In many cases, mine owners buy their equipment and erect it on the spot, and there is 810 always the possibility of some error in erection. Others buy subject to adaptation by themselves. We have found it quite impossible to draft a clause which would cover all these cases. Therefore, we have been forced to the conclusion that the only effective clause we could put in would be one which would apply in cases of express or implied warranty in which both buyer and seller knew the use which was intended for the equipment. But this would take us back to the Merchandise Marks Acts of 1887 and 1953, and there is no point in inserting a redraft of the provisions' made there. In this respect I would say that a trade description has been extended by the 1953 Act to include any description or statement as to quality of goods, making it clear that if, for example, a buyer purchases equipment stated to be flameproof, the person who supplies it is liable under the Merchandise Marks Act if it is not, in fact, flame-proof. There is still a complete safeguard in respect of the description and guarantee of quality for most purposes. I very much hope that the withdrawal of this clause will be accepted by your Lordships, because I think that, as drafted, it would be unenforceable. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Leave out Clause 157.—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ VISCOUNT HALLI must say that we wondered why, in a Bill which was debated so long as this has been in another place, a clause, of so great importance, in the opinion of the miners, is being withdrawn at this stage. I can quite see from the remarks made by the noble Earl that there is some substance in his argument, though I thought he made rather heavy weather of one or two points. There is a good deal of standardisation in the mining industry, the more so since nationalisation, and I should think that every manufacturer of mining equipment would be informed by the managers who deal with the electrical work and the mechanics who deal with machine work about almost every aspect of the difficulties which arise in the mines. But I am not going to deal with that. All I am concerned with is whether there are safeguards in this or any other Bill to prevent the supply of defective machinery to the mines. I think that was the main purpose of the clause. Perhaps the noble Earl will allow me to discuss this matter with some of my friends and then with 811 him, and if he can satisfy us that the point is fully met, then we shall be quite content.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKI see the noble Viscount's point entirely. I should mention that some criticism was made on this point in Committee stage in another place, but this is a complicated Bill and, with one thing and another, we had either not found time to deal with this matter or were reluctant to take action until we were quite convinced that the clause was unenforceable. We withdraw it only because we think it would not provide any protection. The point made by the noble Viscount about the guarantee of any equipment stands absolutely. If any equipment is said to be flame-proof or to hold any other quality which is required, that guarantee and the liabilities arising under the Merchandise Marks Acts stand absolutely. I would express the opinion that there is no weakening of safeguards for those engaged in the mines by the withdrawal of this clause. I shall be happy to discuss it further, but I shall be grateful if I may now withdraw the clause.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 158 agreed to.
§ 3.30 p.m.
§ Clause 159 [Forgery of certificates, false statements, etc.]:
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 95, line 7, at end insert ("or").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThe next Amendment is to make it quite clear that it constitutes an offence to make a false entry in one of the books which under the Bill have to be kept. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 95, line 32, after ("register") insert ("book").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKUnder Clause 137 the Minister may call for information or statistics from any mine. All this Amendment does is to make it clear that anyone who discloses that information, or discloses statistics, in a 812 manner other than provided for in the Bill, is committing an offence. I suppose it is true to say that this applies to a major extent to the Civil Service. I bee to move.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 95, line 42, at end insert—
("(e) discloses any return, statistics or other information in contravention of this Act; or").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 159, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 160 [Removal or defacement of notices, &c.]:
§ VISCOUNT FURNESS moved, after the word "If," to insert: ",without reasonable excuse,". The noble Viscount said: This Amendment is intended to make it quite clear that no offence is committed under this clause if notices posted at mines or quarries are removed or defaced by a person who has a reasonable excuse for doing so; as, for example, when they have become out of date or are not otherwise required to be kept. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, line 15, after ("If") insert the said words.—(Viscount Furness.)
LORD HAWKEI think my noble friend has spotted a small flaw in the Bill, and we have pleasure in accepting this Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ VISCOUNT FURNESSThis Amendment is little more than drafting. It is only to documents for the time being posted or kept that this clause should apply. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, line 16, after ("notice") insert ("which is for the time being").—(Viscount Furness.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ VISCOUNT FURNESSThis is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, line 19, leave out ("has been") and insert ("is for the time being").—(Viscount Furness.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
813§ VISCOUNT FURNESSThis is purely a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, line 21, leave out the second ("be").—(Viscount Furness).
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 160, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 161 [Prosecution of offences]:
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis Amendment is really not much more than drafting. It is to make clear that if, in the course of an inspector's report or public inquiry or coroner's inquest, it appears that a contravention of the Act has taken place, then within three months of that time a prosecution may proceed. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, tine 29, leave out from ("Where") to ("to") in line 32 and insert (",in consequence of an accident of other occurrence at a mine or quarry, a special report is made in pursuance of this Act by an inspector, a report is made by a person, appointed under this Act").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a minor correction which I think we have had before, to make it clear that a contravention can arise not only from' the provisions of this Act, but also from a direction of the inspector, or a condition which may be attached to exemption. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 96, line 34, leave out from ("that") to ("summary") in line 36 and insert (",at or before the time of the accident or other occurrence, there was a contravention, in relation to the mine or quarry, of—
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 97, line 12, leave out ("or given under this Act or regulations") and insert ("under or by virtue of this Act by an inspector").— (The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 161, as amended, agreed to.
814§ Clause 162 agreed to.
§ Clause 163 [Duty to report results of proceedings against persons employed at mines or quarries]:
LORD HAWKEThis is a little more than drafting. We are dealing here with the duty of the manager or the owner to report to the inspector the result of proceedings that have taken place against persons employed at the mines. As the clause is drafted we say merely that he must report; but by amending it to say that he shall give notice to the inspector we provide a statutory form of channel for the giving of that notice. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 97, line 32, leave out ("report the result of the trial to the inspector for the district") and insert ("give to the inspector for the district notice of the result of the trial").—(Lord Hawke.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 97, line 35, leave out ("report the result of those proceedings to the inspector for the district") and insert ("give to the inspector for the district notice of the result of those proceedings").—(Lord Hawke.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 163, as amended, agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is really pure law. The Education Act, 1918, and the Young Persons and Children's Act, 1920, use the enforcement sections of the 1911 Act for the purposes of offences. It is row desirable to incorporate that portion in the present Bill. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 163, insert the following new clause:
§ Proceedings for offences in respect of employment of children
§ (". For the purposes of any proceedings under this Act in respect of the employment of children in contravention of section fourteen of the Education Act, 19.18, section seventeen of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1918, or section one of the Employment of Women, Young Persons and Children Act, 1920 (being enactments which prohibit the employment of children in factories, mines and quarries and, so far as they relate to mines and quarries, are incorporated with this Act), the references in section one hundred and fifty-eight of this Act to a young person shall be construed as 815 including references to a child within the meaning of the said section fourteen, the said section seventeen or the said section one, as the case may be.")—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 164 agreed to.
§ Clause 165 [Division of Mines]:
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 7, after ("served") insert ("by the owner").—(Lord Hawke.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 15, at end insert ("by notice served on the owner of the mine.")—(Lord Hawke.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD HAWKEThis Amendment is a little more than drafting. We are dealing here with the question of the division of mines for administrative purposes where there may be a possibility of a division of responsibility for carrying out the provisions of the Bill. As the clause is drafted at the moment there is a suggestion that division could have taken place in order to evade the provisions of this Bill. That is not a pleasant innuendo, and, moreover, we cannot think of a case which could possibly occur. We feel it would be better to leave it that the inspector, wherever he thinks that safety or health are imperilled, has the power to decide how the separate mines are treated. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 21, leave out from ("opinion") to ("he") in line 25 and insert ("with respect to a mine whereof parts are, by virtue of this section, for the time being treated for the purposes of this Act as separate mines, that the division of the mine prejudices or is likely to prejudice the safety or health of the persons employed thereat (or any of them),").—(Lord Hawke.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 25, leave out ("upon") and insert ("on").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 165, as amended, agreed to.
816§ Clause 166 [Demarcation of quarries]:
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis clause deals with the demarcation of quarries, and the Amendment makes it quite clear that the inspector may require that the boundaries of the quarries be marked and that the information be provided to him in writing. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 33, leave out from ("may") to ("to") in line 39, and insert ("by notice served on the owner of the quarries in a case where the same person is owner of both quarries, or on the respective owners of the quarries in any other case, require that, before the expiration of such period as may be specified in the notice, the boundary between the two quarries shall be determined by the owner or, as the case may be, by agreement between the respective owners and as so determined shall be notified to the inspector for the district by written instrument lodged with him by the owner or owners, and the boundary as so notified in compliance with the requirements of the notice shall, subject to any subsequent variation so determined and notified, be deemed for the purposes of this Act").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 98, line 43, after ("with") insert ("the requirements of").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 166, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 167 [Provisions as to references upon notices served by inspectors]:
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis Amendment allows for the fact that there may be two managers of a quarry. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 99, line 3, leave out from ("regulations") to ("being") in line 4 and insert ("by an inspector on the owner or manager of a mine or the owner or a manager of a quarry").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 99, line 5, leave out ("in relation").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ 3.42 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKWe now come to provisions for reference in any disagreement or when an owner wishes 817 to challenge a direction given by an inspector. In those circumstances, the matter stands referred to the arrangements provided here. The arrangements generally are similar to those which existed in the 1911 Act, but the manner in which they are selected is rather different. In view of this, perhaps I might explain what is proposed here. The first step is that the Minister selects panels who will be suitable, from their experience and, so far as possible, geographically, to examine any particular point which may arise. In the second place, the Minister, in consultation with the Lord Chancellor and the Lord President of the Court of Session, will nominate a selector. The third step will be that when a case arises it will be for the selector to decide which member of the appropriate panel is suitable in that particular case. The need for this procedure arises because the Minister is an interested party in every reference through his inspector. We hope, by this procedure, to obtain a completely independent selector and, secondly, to do it in a manner which will avoid any delay. Our experience has shown that this sort of procedure is very rare, and whilst we cannot anticipate what the future may hold we hope that this arrangement will be successful. I have really been speaking about all the remaining Amendments—with the exception of that of the noble Viscount, Lord Hall—to this clause: they hang together as one piece. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 99, line 13, leave out paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) and insert ("a person or persons selected by the nominated selector (as hereinafter defined) from amongst the members of that one of the panels of persons appointed by the Minister under this section which is appropriate to the circumstances of the ease:
Provided that, if the said selector is satisfied that special reasons exist which render it expedient for him to act as referee instead of a person or persons selected as aforesaid, he may direct that the notice shall stand referred to him.")—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ VISCOUNT HALLWe have been fully met in connection with this matter, which was discussed in another place, and we are quite happy with the present situation. Therefore, by leave of the House, I will not move my Amendment No. 331.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
818§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 99, line 30, leave out ("or") and insert ("and").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is also a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 100, line 16, after ("a") insert ("prohibition, restriction, or").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 100, line 25, leave out from ("relates") to end of line 29 and insert ("neither prejudices nor is likely to prejudice the safety or health of any of the persons employed at the mine;").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis also is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 101, line 6, leave out ("cost") and insert ("costs").—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis is the Amendment to which I spoke on Amendment number 330. I beg to move.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 101, line 15, at end insert—
("(9) The reference in subsection (2) of this section to the nominated selector shall be construed as referring to such person as may for the time being be nominated by the Minister, after consultation with the Lord Chancellor and the Lord President of the Court of Session, to discharge the duty of selecting referees to act upon references under this section.")—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 167, as amended, agreed to.
§ 3.47 p.m.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (LORD LLOYD)As I have a statement to make I beg to move that the House do now resume.
§ Moved, That the House do now resume.—(Lord Lloyd.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to, and House resumed accordingly.
819LORD LLOYDMy Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I should like to make a statement similar to that being made at this time in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies on some aspects of affairs in Cyprus. Since the statement made by my right honourable friend in another place on July 28, there has been a good deal of discussion about the affairs of the Colony both in this country and abroad. I should like to take this opportunity of making the position of Her Majesty's Government clear.
Questions have been asked recently about the sedition laws in Cyprus as they relate to the Press. No new law relating to sedition or the Press has been promulgated or announced in Cyprus recently. All that the Attorney-General of Cyprus did was to issue a statement drawing attention to the existing laws, and to the penalties on conviction by the courts for violations of them. These included the sections of the criminal law relating to publications with seditious intentions which have not been amended since 1949, and have in broad outline been in effect for much longer than that; also the Press law, which was last amended in 1947. Copies of these parts of the law of Cyprus and of the text of the Attorney-General's statement have been placed in the Printed Paper Office. The Attorney-General of Cyprus, on whom alone rests the responsibility for deciding whether proceedings should be instituted, has made it plain that no prosecutions would take place for the reproduction of articles printed or speeches made in this country, unless the publication was being made a pretext to incite to sedition or violence in Cyprus. As there has been some misunderstanding of the Attorney-General's statements of the law, I must recall that, in seeing the local Press, he emphasised that constructive criticism was welcomed, and he made it clear that he would approach each case in a broad-minded fashion. There have, in fact, been no prosecutions since his statement.
My right honourable friend has carefully examined the law of Cyprus relating to seditious offences. There is a provision, over twenty years old, which makes seditious an intention to bring about a change in the sovereignty of the 820 Colony. This was added to the preexisting law shortly after the serious troubles which occurred in 1931. Apart from this, the law in Cyprus is similar to that in most other Colonial territories, and he sees no reason to take steps to have it repealed or amended. He has, however, invited the Governor to consider repeal of a provision in the Press law of 1947, which empowers the courts to order the suspension of newspapers convicted by the courts of seditious libel. This would mean that a person found guilty in Cyprus of a seditious offence connected with the Press would be liable only to fine or imprisonment, as is a person found guilty of sedition in this country. The effect of this would be to leave the Press in Cyprus liable only to penalties under the criminal law for seditious offences.
I turn now to some other questions. Noble Lords will know that the United Nations have acceded to a request by the Greek Government to inscribe the question of Cyprus on their agenda. I am not proposing to go into Her Majesty's Government's attitude towards this request, as this was described in a White Paper issued on Tuesday: but I must, however, repeat that British sovereignty over Cyprus was recognised by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 to which the Greek Government was a party. I must emphasise that Her Majesty's Government have to pay regard to the well-being and long-term interests of the whole population, and to the rights of minorities, as well as to strategic needs and the requirements of peace and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean. The agitation by certain Church leaders and by the Communists for Enosis must not be allowed to obscure the real achievements of British rule in Cyprus, especially since the war. Conditions in Cyprus certainly compare very favourably with those anywhere else in that part of the world. Constitutional progress has so far lagged behind economic, and the policy of Her Majesty's Government is to encourage political responsibility within the framework of the new Constitution which we have proposed as the first step towards internal self-government.
Agitation for a change of sovereignty can only hamper these efforts. We are determined to persevere with this new Constitution, and all responsible Cypriots 821 should now co-operate in making a success of this important move towards self-government. The Governor is still engaged in working out the detailed proposals, and I shall lay them before the House at the first opportunity. I repeat: these arrangements contemplate no change in the sovereignty of Cyprus. The question has been asked what is to be the ultimate goal of constitutional progress in Cyprus. Before an answer can be given the Cypriot people must first join with us in taking the first steps towards managing their own affairs. In the present troubled state of the world we cannot foresee a time when a relinquishment of our sovereignty over Cyprus would be compatible with our responsibilities for security in the Middle East. Neither my right honourable friend nor I have attempted to prophesy where constitutional development may ultimately lead, nor are we prepared to look into the distant future at a time when we still cannot see clearly the outcome of our fresh step towards constitutional advance.
§ VISCOUNT HALLMy Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord for making this statement. Obviously we cannot discuss the matter now, but I would ask the noble Marquess the Leader of the House whether at some time in the future we may have an opportunity of discussing the situation in Cyprus. I think it is better it should be left in that way. May I, before I sit down, extend to the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd, my hearty congratulations upon his transfer to one of the old offices which I myself held? What is more interesting is that for the last nine months of his father's life I acted as his Under-Secretary at the Colonial Office. That was a very happy and close association, much closer than I expected it to be when I went into the office. Apart from the happenings to his father, it was a very happy association. I am sure that the noble Lord is going to maintain the reputation for good administration which his father held whilst he was the Colonial Secretary and whilst I was his Under-Secretary.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)My Lords, the noble Viscount, Lord Hall, has asked about the possibilities of a debate on the subjects dealt 822 with in the statement just made by my noble friend. As he will, I think, be aware, we have in contemplation a debate on foreign affairs. It has for some time been our custom in this House to wait for a debate until one has taken place in another place. That has not yet happened. I suggest that the best plan would be for us to keep in touch with the Party of the noble Viscount opposite through the usual channels and fix a date as soon as we can for such a debate to take place. I do not know whether the noble Viscount was suggesting that a separate day should be set aside for a discussion on Cyprus, but I should have thought it would be better to include it in an ordinary foreign affairs debate. We are rather short of time, and I think we could cover the subject adequately in that way. If that is convenient to the noble Viscount, I hope we can have such a debate in the next fortnight or thereabouts.
§ VISCOUNT HALLWe are quite prepared to consider that suggestion, but I hope that this merging of the Colonial Office with the Foreign Office is not the thin end of the wedge.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI should be the last person in the world to suggest that Cyprus is a Foreign Office matter, but the subject does arise over the Greek application, which your Lordships know of, to the United Nations. If it were thought more appropriate to have a separate debate, we would certainly consider that. If I have given any grounds for misapprehension, may I say that the last thing in the world I wish to suggest is that Cyprus is not strictly a British affair.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I should like to ask a question. In this statement it is stated that the British Government intend to proceed with the new Constitution that has been offered to the people of Cyprus. That Constitution, it is stated, is a forerunner of some Constitution that may follow later on when Cyprus is more ready for it. The question I should like to ask is rather important. Are early steps proposed for fresh conversations with the Archbishop, to see whether accommodation cannot be reached or co-operation secured in order to make this Constitution more workable in that island?
LORD LLOYDMy Lords, the noble Lord will appreciate that, as I said in the statement, at the moment not even the Constitution itself has finally been decided. Clearly, any conversations that may lead to the working of this Constitution would be considered. But I do not think at this stage he could expect me to say precisely who will be consulted. That is a matter which will have to be left till a little later on. The important thing, as we see it, is that the Constitution should come into force and that all those who are willing to work it should be approached, so that we can get the first step in Cyprus towards self-government, which we believe is very important.