§ 3.16 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government to state what representations have been received from the Prime Minister of the Central Africa Federation with regard to the Conference on Northern Rhodesia, and what answer has been sent to Sir Roy Welensky from Her Majesty's Government.]
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, communications between Commonwealth Prime Ministers are, of course, confidential. Noble Lords may, however, wish 409 me to say something more about the circumstances of the present case. Her Majesty's Government have an obligation to consult the Government of the Federation in regard to the changes in the Constitutions of the Territories of the Federation. This obligation arises from the Conference on Federation held in London in 1953, and perhaps I might quote paragraph 38 of the Report which gives rise to this:
As regards amendments of the Territory Constitution, the existing machinery and the responsibility of Her Majesty's Minister in the United Kingdom remain unchanged, but Her Majesty's Minister would naturally seek the view of the Federal Government before advising Her Majesty.It was in pursuance of that obligation that we have sought the views of the Federal Government in the present case. I should, however, make it clear that while there is this obligation to seek the views of the Federal Government, and, of course, to consider them, it does not take away the final responsibility of Her Majesty's Government for decisions on these matters.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am much obliged to the noble and learned Viscount for that Answer. May I ask him, first of all, whether he is aware that I put this Question down before Answers were given yesterday by the Secretary of State to a number of Questions? If I understand the position aright (and perhaps the noble and learned Viscount will correct me if I am wrong), this position arose during the Christmas Recess. But so far I have not seen anywhere any reason given as having been communicated to the Secretary of State here by the Prime Minister of the Central African Federation for boycotting the Conference, or what kind of answer, if any, has been sent. I think the situation may possibly build up into one of some danger. The better informed Parliament and public opinion may be, the easier it will be for the Secretary of State to stick to that interpretation of the position in this matter which was given to the other place yesterday and which has been repeated by his noble friend to-day.
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I fully agree with the noble Viscount that the more we can inform Parliament, the better for everybody, inside Parliament and outside of it. We cannot, of 410 course, carry that to the length of breaking the convention of the confidential character of communications between Prime Ministers.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, while I am sure that none of us would wish to say anything which would make agreement more difficult in this case, I should like to ask the Secretary of State whether, if unhappily there should not be agreement, both Houses of Parliament will be informed and have an opportunity of expressing an opinion before a Constitution is promulgated.
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I should naturally like notice of that question, because this is a matter within my right honourable friend's departmental responsibility, and I have not had the opportunity of asking him about my noble friend's question. I am sure that. in general, he would wish to consult Parliament before taking irrevocable steps.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords. I am much obliged to the noble Viscount for that. But I would ask if he would mind looking at the answer given yesterday in the other place at the end of particular questions to the Secretary of State. When the Secretary of State was asked the reason he said [OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons, Vol. 634, col. 189]:
…I imagine, although I have not been given formal notice of this, that the reason was that the Federal Prime Minister found unsatisfactory the message he was sent from Her Majesty's Government some weeks ago".I do not want to prolong the matter now, but would it not be for the convenience of your Lordships if the Government could print that notice again for us, if we have not seen it, in the OFFICIAL REPORT, so that we can see exactly what was the communiqué which led Sir Roy Welensky to organise his boycott of the Conference?
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I am afraid that this is a matter of which I have not direct personal knowledge. My noble friend Lord Perth says that there was, in fact, no notice published, and there is probably some misunderstanding. But perhaps I may read what the noble Viscount has said, and. if I have in any way misinformed him, I will try to communicate with him.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, may I ask the noble and learned Viscount whether he does not agree that it is likely to make agreement at this Territorial Conference, which we all desire, more difficult if delegates get the impression, which I am afraid many have received, that the Government are conducting other negotiations behind their backs? That is only an impression, but it is an impression that has been made upon their minds. May I also ask whether, had it been possible—I do not know whether it was—it would not have been more desirable that these central consultations with the Federal Government on Her Majesty's Government's policy should have taken place before the Territorial Conference began?
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I hope that the Question and Answer which has been given have made it plain that we did no more than was our obligation under paragraph 38 of the 1953 document which I quoted. I am sure that the noble Earl, who is always so helpful in this matter, will be able to use his own great influence with all concerned to explain that this is so.
LORD REAMy Lords, if I understood the noble Viscount aright I think he said that, after looking into the matter, he would communicate with the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition. Could he go further and say that he will let your Lordships' House have the information which he is able to elucidate?
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I think what happened was that the noble Viscount, refreshing his memory by the OFFICIAL REPORT of the Proceedings in another place, put a question which proceeded upon an assumption which my noble friend said was incorrect. I felt that I might have been wrong about that, because I was obviously proceeding without personal investigation, and I told the noble Viscount that if I had misled him I would certainly so inform him. But I hope that, in the meantime, noble Lords will assume that the information conveyed by my noble friend was correct.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am obliged; but if we cannot get more sense than that we shall have to press further Questions.
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords. the noble Viscount is very welcome to press further Questions. But what I was seeking to establish at the beginning of my Answer is that we cannot breach the convention of the confidential character of certain communications.
§ LORD COLYTONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Viscount whether he is aware that many people in this country are deeply disturbed about these Northern Rhodesian negotiations, with the bearing they have on the whole question of the future of the Federation? May I ask him whether he will impress upon the Government the importance of recognising realities—what is politically possible—from the European point of view. as well as from the African point of view? Can we not now, whatever proposals have been put forward—I have seen only Press reports of what they are—have a completely fresh start, following the return from Salisbury of the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations after his remarkably successful visit and negotiations there?
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I am sure that all your Lordships share the concern of my noble friend about negotiations now in progress. I should almost despair of an Administration if I had to impress upon them the need for having regard to realities. I hope that my noble friend's confidence in the Administration will at least extend to the assumption that this is exactly what we try to take account of. The other question was a little more wide, and I think rather more wide than the original Question; but I will certainly draw my right honourable friend's attention to what my noble friend has said.
§ EARL WINTERTONMy Lords, may I ask a question arising out of the answer the noble Viscount the Leader of the House has given? I understood him to say that he would consider whether we could have a debate but that he would have to consult the Colonial Secretary. Surely it is not a question of consulting the Colonial Secretary. This is a matter which affects the whole Government and affects the relationship between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. Could he give us at any rate an assurance that he will do his best to arrange a debate, since many of us in 413 your Lordships' House, and I think many in another place, wish to defend my right honourable friend, as I am proud to call him, Sir Roy Welensky, from what we believe to be most unfair attacks made on him from certain quarters?
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMMy Lords, I think that my noble friend has referred to a somewhat different matter. It does not rest with my colleagues but with this House to decide whether a subject shall be debated. The matter on which my noble friend Lord Swinton was asking for an assurance was one which did concern my right honourable friend, and I prefaced my answer by saying that I should like notice of the question. An assurance can be given in terms only after consultation.