NYASALAND FRANCHISE REGULATIONS (Hansard, 28 February 1961)

§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLE
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF PERTH)
My Lords, the Executive Council was not consulted in this matter. The regulations were based on the recommendations of the Working Party specifically established by the Constitutional Conference held last year to draw up detailed recommendations for such matters as the definition of the franchise qualifications, the registration of voters, the qualifications and nomination of candidates, the delimitation of constituencies and other matters preparatory to the holding of elections. Its work was essentially an extension of the Lancaster House Conference which laid down that those represented at the Conference should be kept in touch with the progress of the work of this Working Party. Many of the delegates to that Conference are not members of Executive Council: on the ocher hand, virtually all members of the Executive Council were consulted by the Governor and my right honourable friend in their capacity of delegates to the Conference. The question of instruction to the Governor that he need not consult the Executive Council did not arise.
As regards the last part of the Question, legal authority stems from the Nyasaland Legislative Council (Registration of Voters and Delimitation of Constituencies) Regulations, 1961, made under the Nyasaland (Electoral Provisions) Orders in Council, 1960, which were laid before Parliament on December 6 and 30, 1960, respectively.
With your Lordships' permission, may I take this opportunity to correct a misstatement which I made regarding the position of ex-Portuguese Africans in answering a supplementary question on this general subject in your Lordships' House three weeks ago? I have not done this before, because it was only to-day that my attention was drawn to my mistake. What I specifically refer to is that I said that the Federal Government ran into precisely the same difficulty of definition in regard to ex- 6 Portuguese Africans when they were drawing up their electoral laws. This is not so. They ran into the same difficulty in drawing up not, as I thought, their electoral legislation, but some of their Federal immigration legislation, under which ex-Portuguese Africans were excluded from the definition of "aliens". I am extremely sorry that I misled the House, and that I have only to-day been able to put matters right.

§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLE
My Lords, while thanking the noble Earl for his answers to the two parts of the Question, may I say that I have not quite understood the last definition? May I ask whether he thinks fiat putting unauthorised Portuguese on the lower roll will place European Portuguese similarly qualified by residence, at a disadvantage unless admitted to the higher roll? That is to say, assuming that in any case amending legislation is considered necessary—which is the point I cannot quite understand from the noble Earl's answer—will amending legislation need to be brought in to bring these unauthorised foreigners on our rolls?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, if I understand the further question of the noble Earl, I think it is similar to that which was raised three weeks ago. I explained at that time, and I repeat, that there is no question of discrimination between the Portuguese African and the Portuguese European. In one case we can distinguish which is which, and in the other we cannot. It is for administrative reasons that the Portuguese East African is included, or may be included, whereas the other is excluded. As I said in my first Answer, that is being arranged under the Order in Council which was laid at the end of last year. There is no question, I think, of a need to amend legislation.

§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLE
My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Earl, but I still do not understand why there is not an imbalance between the higher and the lower roll. In one roll certain people will be admitted; the other roll will be deficient of those people, who are in good standing in the community, pay their taxes and have resided there several years. Therefore, there seems to be an inequality about dealing with the two cases on the two rolls 7 Could the noble Earl give me a little further information?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, I will try again. The difference is just this: in one case we can say, "That is a Portuguese European and he does not therefore come within the regulations". In the other case we are not able to discriminate or judge whether he is a Portuguese African or, if I may put it this way, a Nyasaland African. He may have crossed the frontier and lived in Nyasaland many years, and it is not possible to judge between one and the other of the Africans.

§ LORD DERWENT
My Lords, may I ask the noble Earl how he judges who is a Portuguese East African and who is a European? They are very intermarried in some cases. Some have spent a long time in Africa and some have spent a long time in Portugal. Can he say how the differentiation is made?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, I think we must leave that to the registration officer on the spot.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
My Lords, may I raise one point on the general issue which is raised by this Question. Does the noble Earl really think it is wise that the Executive Council should not be consulted at all on a matter so vitally affecting the future of Nyasaland?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, I have tried in my earlier Answer to explain that this whole question was, if I may put it that way, an extension of the work of the Constitutional Conference, and that it was laid down that the Working Party should keep in touch with or should inform the members of the Conference of the work they were doing and the conclusions they were coming to. In those circumstances all the members of the Conference were consulted, and that did, in fact, include a large number—the greater part—of the Executive Council who were members of the Conference.

§ LORD MILVERTON
My Lords, is it not correct to say that it is part of the instructions given to every Governor that in a matter of public importance his Executive Council have the right to have it laid before them? Is not the fact that 8 some of them may in another capacity have had the matter referred to them irrelevant to the fact that this was a neglect of rights of members of the Executive Council and neglect of instructions given to every Governor?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, I do not think so, for the reasons I tried to give in my original Answer to the Question. I suggest that the noble Lord should study that Answer and see whether I have not outlined good grounds.

§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLE
My Lords, as a final effort on this matter, may I ask when consultation was had with representatives of the United Federal Party? I am informed that these people were not taken into account until after the Secretary of State had come to his decision, and in the final case the proposals were handed over only after the New Year, when time was far too short for them to be discussed before the Gazette, No. 2 of 1961, came out.

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
The consultation took place, as I remember it, at the time of the Federal Conference. As to whether the United Federal Party were adequately consulted, I may say that it is always a question of what consultation or adequate consultation may be. But the fact remains that various of the suggestions which were made as a result of the Working Party were changed after consultation with the United Federal Party.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
My Lords, will the noble Earl bring the point raised by my noble friend, Lord Milverton, to the attention of his right honourable friend the Colonial Secretary? It seems to me an important one. If it is true that there is a general instruction to all Governors that matters of real importance to the community must be brought before the Executive Council (I do not know the exact wording) does it not seem—I am sure it does to many of us—that there was an exception in the present case?

§ THE EARL OF PERTH
My Lords, certainly I shall be only too glad to draw the attention of my right honourable friend to this 9 matter. It may have been wrong judgment. I do not think so in the light of the whole background I have tried to outline. This was not a matter for the Executive Council. Rather was it a matter for the members of the Conference, the work of the Working Party being specifically an extension of the work of the Conference.