Lords Sitting of 16 November 1961

Preamble
The House met at three of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Worcester

NO-PARKING SIGNS IN CENTRAL LONDON
3.5 p.m.
LORD KENNET: My 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 over how many street-miles in central London where parking is forbidden are no-parking signs or symbols visible, over how many miles are they not, and how much it would cost to paint a yellow line everywhere where parking is forbidden.]
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM): My Lords, assessment in terms of street miles is difficult, but in the Central London parking meter zones after November 27 there will be about 150 miles of kerbside subject to waiting restrictions. These are indicated by the signs at the entrances to the zones, which state that parking is permitted only at meters, and by the yellow lines on the carriageway where loading and unloading are prohibited. In the remainder of the Central area, there are about 20 miles of kerbside subject to waiting restrictions. There are signs at intervals of about 200 feet. In addition, where loading is prohibited, a solid yellow line is painted across the kerb. It would cost approximately £50,000 per annum to paint a yellow line wherever waiting is restricted.
LORD KENNET: My Lords, would the noble Lord bear in mind that the problem for the motorist is to know whether he is in the zone or not; that there are many miles of streets in the zone without any meters, any yellow line, or any signs at all; and that it is quite a burden on the motorist's memory to be conscious at all times whether or not he has passed a sign some time earlier in the day?
LORD CHESHAM: My Lords, I shall be glad to bear that in mind. The noble Lord may like to know that we are at present considering various measures on that very subject in conjunction with the police and the local authorities.
LORD HAWKE: My Lords, would my noble friend convey to his right honourable friend that possibly £50,000 would not be at all a dear price to pay for this facility?
LORD CHESHAM: I will certainly convey that, my Lords.

IMPORTS FROM CUBA
LORD COLYTON: My 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 whether, in the forthcoming negotiations with the Cuban Government for the renewal of the Anglo-Cuban Trade Agreement, full regard will be given, first to the damage which has been caused to the Jamaican cigar industry by the existing quota for Cuban cigars which has risen to 1½ million dollars for 1961; and secondly to the undesirability of expending large sums of money on imports from Cuba while the Cuban Government still refuse to pay any compensation for British property seized by them.]
THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD MILLS): My Lords, in considering the future of the AngloCuban Trade Agreement, which expires at the end of this year, Her Majesty's Government will take full account of the interests of the Jamaican cigar industry. The value of imports of Jamaican cigars in 1960 was £387,000, which was considerably above the figures for the two preceding years. Jamaican cigars enjoy a preferential tariff in the United Kingdom market and can be imported without any restriction as to quantity. On the second part of the Question, my noble friend Lord Dundee said on November 8 that we have already demanded the restoration of expropriated British property in

731
Cuba and we shall continue to press for this. While recognising the importance for our commercial relations with Cuba of a solution to this problem, it would not be helpful at this stage if we attempted to link it directly with the level of trade in particular products between the two countries.
LORD COLYTON: My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his reply, I should like to ask him whether he is aware of the fact that the present large-scale unemployment in Jamaica is bound to be increased by the impending Commonwealth Immigrants Bill; and whether, in view of this, and also of the very high-handed treatment of British interests in Cuba in general, Her Majesty's Government will in fact not consider terminating entirely the quota for Havana cigars when the present trade agreement expires. It really seems to me that it is a luxury which on grounds of self-interest or self-respect we can no longer afford.
LORD MILLS: My Lords, the public have it in their own hands to buy Jamaican cigars if they wish to. As I say, they have a preferential tariff and can be imported freely. But in considering this matter we must have regard for the fact that we export to Cuba also, and I do not think it would be the path of wisdom just to abolish the quota for Cuban cigars; nor do I think it would be generally desired.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH: My Lords, in view of the basis of the supplementary question from Lord Colyton, I wonder whether the noble Lord, Lord Mills, has yet had any consultations with an expert on this matter and a heavy user of what was described as "a luxury" and, I think, as something else—Sir Winston Churchill? Why not consult him about it?
LORD MILLS: My Lords, perhaps the noble Viscount might have a word with him.

EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL
Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and to be printed.

TANGANYIKA INDEPENDENCE BILL
3.13 p.m.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF PERTH): My Lords, I have it in Command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Tanganyika Independence Bill, has consented to place Her Majesty's prerogative and interests, so far as they are affected by the Bill, at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.
My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. Once again, it is my privilege to bring to your Lordships a Bill giving independence to a Territory which has been under our care for a considerable time. This time, I think it is of especial significance because the Territory concerned is Tanganyika and it is the first of the Territories in East Africa. Tanganyika itself, as many of your Lordships know, is the largest of the East African Territories, about four times the size of the United Kingdom. It is also the most populous having some 9 million inhabitants, of whom a small part, about 150,000, are of races other than African, whether they be Asian, Arab or European. In the main, it is an agricultural country, depending on such crops as sisal, cotton and coffee, but there are large areas where agriculture is difficult because of the tsetse fly and the shortage of water. The only mineral deposits that have been discovered are diamonds and the Williamson Diamond Mines are producing an important addition to the wealth of the country.
All this does not dismay the Government of Tanganyika, who are shortly to embark on a new development programme about which I wish to talk a little more fully later. I just mention it now because it shows their determination to go forward for the wellbeing of their people; and I am sure that, despite the handicaps that I have outlined, they will be successful. I am all the more sure that they will be successful because from a business point of view conditions in Tanganyika are very favourable. The

733
Government have always acted in a prudent and wise way and there exists that valuable thing, confidence in the country, and because of that confidence I am sure that they can rely on help coming from outside sources.
Our own responsibility for Tanganyika has been a short one, of only some 40 years. We took the country over as a mandated territory after the First World War and continued to look after its wellbeing until after the Second World War, when the United Nations came into being and it became a Trust territory. We have carried on with it as a Trust territory ever since. I am happy to say that there has been great progress during those 40 years. Of course, one can say that not enough has been done and that there is still much to do, but the progress has been remarkable. Thanks to the work of the civil servants, missionaries and others who have done so much to help, the country is provided with roads, railways, harbours, hospitals and schools. I have figures which show, for example, that in 1947 primary education was available to only some 120,000 children, whereas today it is available to 450,000 children, an increase of almost four times in the last fifteen years. I think that is a good record of progress. In regard to secondary and technical education, I know that your Lordships have been interested in the opening this autumn of a law faculty in the University College of Tanganyika at Dar-es-Salaam. Of course, if the Government of Tanganyika want more help from us on the technical side, we remain anxious and ready to give it and there is a Department of Technical Cooperation precisely for this purpose.
All this is not something on which the present Government are prepared to rest. They have worked out a new development programme for the next three years, largely based on a plan worked out by the World Bank. It is, in fact, something more ambitious than that suggested by the World Bank, and it is none the worse for that. One would expect them to do something even more. That development plan is calculated to cost £24 million, of which we have undertaken to underwrite up to £12 million, or half of the whole, and of that £12 million we are prepared to grant £8,750,000 under the old Commonwealth Development and Welfare Fund arid the balance under a new
734
grant. Your Lordships will recall that this was all worked out in July when Mr. Julius Nyerere came to this country. The conversations were rather difficult and ran into trouble, but the final outcome, as I give it to your Lordships now, has been one which is fully satisfactory to the people of Tanganyika and I am very happy that we have been able to help their development programme in the way we have.
That is not the whole of it. We have also undertaken to make funds available for the Tanganyika Agricultural Corporation and for army development, by taking over certain stores, and by agreeing that the Colonial Development Corporation can put forward funds. Most important, perhaps, of the loans that we are prepared to make to help the Tanganyika Government is one to ensure the payment of compensation and other expenses for the Overseas Civil Service. While on the point of help for Tanganyika's development programme, I should say how welcome has been the announcement made by the American and German Governments that they will play their part in making funds available for Tanganyika's development programme.
I mentioned the overseas service. Without their help Tanganyika could never have reached the stage it has now. I am sure all your Lordships would join me in the tribute one would wish to pay to that Service. When one thinks of the Overseas Service, naturally one turns to the Governor and recent Governors of the territory. As your Lordships know we have one of them here to-day in the noble Lord, Lord Twining, who served the country before the present Governor for no less than nine years; and your Lordships know of the progress that was made during that period. I recall that .the noble Lord has written a book about the Crown jewels of Europe. But it seems to me that he has a jewel in his crown in what he has done to help Tanganyika forward which is at least as bright as any of those.
Then we have the present Governor, Sir Richard Turnbull, whose tenure of office in this exciting phase of constitutional development has been everything that one could call for and expect. The proof of that, if proof were needed, is the fact that the Government of

735
Tanganyika have asked that his name be submitted to Her Majesty The Queen as the first Governor-General of the territory. I am sure your Lordships feel with me that his well-doing and the trust that they have in him is shown by this action.
When I mention civil servants, I think it is very satisfactory that, so far, of those who are serving and who have the opportunity at a change-over like this of leaving the country, only a relatively small number, somewhere around 20 per cent., have indicated that they want to go to other fields. This shows not only that the Government and people of Tanganyika run their affairs well, but also—and I think this is important—that the arrangements we have recently made through the Overseas Services Aid Scheme have helped to ensure that these civil servants may stay and yet not suffer loss. Your Lordships know how vital it is at a moment of transition like this, until such time as the Africans are able to take over the running of their affairs, that they should have every help from those who have the experience.
This is, as I say, most satisfactory; and the main credit for it goes to the Prime Minister of Tanganyika, Mr. Julius Nyerere. No doubt many of your Lordships know him. He is a man of great wisdom and charm, very skilful in negotiation and, perhaps I should say, moderate in his presentation of his demands. The result of all that, and the peaceful way in which the country has been led to its present state, has been a natural one—namely, that one is predisposed to try to help him forward on the road that he has set. I think it is just because of the moderation and wisdom with which he has handled these affairs that we find that Tanganyika is the first of the East African territories to reach independence. Perhaps there is some moral in this, and, if there is, it may be that it will not be lost on others in the territories in that area.
Something which is perhaps as satisfactory as anything in the last years has been the real partnership between all of the races in Tanganyika. If your Lordships look at the present Government, you will find that elected Ministers
736
and nominated Ministers are African, Asian and European. They have all pulled and worked together. It is invidious to pick out any particular names, but, having said that, I want to pay particular tribute to Sir Ernest Vasey, at present the Finance Minister of Tanganyika, and before that Finance Minister in Kenya. There is no doubt that East Africa, as a whole, and Kenya and Tanganyika, in particular, owe a great debt to him for what he has done in helping forward their economies.
I should now turn to the Bill itself, which names the day of December the 9th for Tanganyika's attainment of fully responsible status within the Commonwealth. Happily, it has been announced that Her Majesty The Queen will be represented by His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh at the independence celebrations. I am sure your Lordships will not be surprised at the tremendously warm welcome that this news has received in Tanganyika.
I have expressed my regret that this Bill is being, as it were, speeded through the Houses of Parliament, but, as your Lordships know, this is often the way in the case of such Bills, because once the date has been fixed there is much work still to be done, and naturally the country is anxious to get on with things. There is a technical angle, in that until a Bill like this has been passed it is not possible to announce what may be the actual Constitution of the country. That is laid down by an Order in Council only after the Bill has been approved. So it is of great importance that this Bill should be passed quickly, and then be followed by the Order in Council for the Constitution; and that Constitution will, of course, be laid for information in your Lordships' House or in the Library. It is not right for me to anticipate beyond a point just what will be in that Constitution, but I can say it has been worked out in full collaboration with the Tanganyika Government, and it has been agreed to recommend a Constitution which is broadly along the lines of the Constitution that Tanganyika enjoys at the present time.
Clause 1 of the Bill is in the usual form that these things follow for territories which are about to become independent. Clause 2 deals with nationality. Here, again, the form is very similar, for example, to what was done in the

737
case of Nigeria and Sierra Leone. Clause 3 covers certain modifications of United Kingdom enactments which are necessary in view of the fact that Tanganyika is shortly to be independent.
Clause 4 deals with the Tanganyika Agricultural Corporation, and the fact that we are going to continue to provide the help which was promised to that Corporation even after the independence of the country. The Agricultural Corporation, as many of your Lordships will remember, is the successor to the groundnuts scheme of long ago. It took over the remaining parts of which use could be made, and has in fact over the years done a great service in developing not only what was left to be developed but in generally helping forward the agricultural well-being of the country. I know that the Tanganyika Government have in mind to continue so to use it. Lastly, in Clause 4. we have mention of the money under the Colonial Development and Welfare Funds which may be available. I refer to Clause 4 (3), for common services with other territories. What we have in mind there, of course, is the East Africa High Commission as it is known to-day, which, when Tanganyika becomes independent, will change its name, and certain of its functions, and become known for the future as the East African Common Services Organisation.
It is a source of great satisfaction that this body is to continue to operate and to continue to give common economic services to the East African territories for so many things which are of common interest to them all—for example, transport, communications, collection of income tax, customs and excise, and various common fields of research. The preservation of this form of economic unity, is, I think, a tremendous encouragement. The confirmation that they wanted to continue with all this came out of a conference in July, in which all the territories were present, and Zanzibar was an observer. It was a most satisfactory conference, filling one with great hope for future collaboration in that part of the world. As I need hardly say, if, looking beyond the economic side, the territories also wish to consider closer political association, the groundwork of that is laid. It is essentially something for the African territories themselves to decide, but this is a good
738
move in the right direction, if they so wish.
It is a great pleasure for me to commend to your Lordships this Bill which will result in a new member of the Commonwealth. Tanganyika, of course, will be the youngest, but I am sure that she will prove to be one of the best. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister has heard from the Commonwealth Prime Ministers that they will be very glad to accept Tanganyika as a fellow-member of the Commonwealth as from the date of her independence—that is, December 9. This is both welcome and happy news, and I am sure that all the Commonwealth stands to benefit from her joining with them. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a —(The Earl of Perth.)
3.32 p.m.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH: My Lords, it is with great pleasure that I speak for the Opposition this afternoon in support of the Second Reading of this Bill. It is a very important occasion, because it brings to our Commonwealth circle another member of which we can certainly all be proud already, and to whose future purpose and development we look forward with eagerness and in confidence. The Bill is quite short. It is on the usual lines, and the only point about which I am not very happy is in Clause 4. I wonder whether it could not have been made a little more explicit. It seemed to me, from the rather general remarks the noble Earl made about what aids would be available to Tanganyika in certain circumstances, that it might be that you were going to do a little better for them than you used to do when independence came to what had been previously looked upon as either a colonial, or akin to a colonial territory.
The noble Earl spoke with pleasure—I do not disagree with that—of the continued promise of help from America and Germany. I notice that in some of its Common Market propaganda Germany speaks very strongly of the great amount of aid it has lent abroad already in spite of the handicaps that it has had following the war. I hope that we shall not be in any way behind such a territory as Germany in giving all the

739
assistance we possibly can to such territories. I think that is fundamentally important.
I do not wish to comment in detail upon the rest of the Bill, except to say a few things about the territory and about the prospects of the independent Government that will be taking over in such a very short space of time on December 9. May I say that we are all grateful for the very prompt response from the other countries of the Commonwealth for this unanimous agreement of admitting Tanganyika at once, next month, into the Commonwealth of Nations. Of course, one is particularly impressed, as one moves from phase to phase of the various developments which have taken place in modern years in building up the numbers of members of the Commonwealth, at the different sets of circumstances, the different difficulties that one encounters economically, the very great difference, sometimes, in temperament and in educational preparation for these developments. And whilst I have always been exceedingly glad to get an agreement on independence and, in practically all cases, continuing membership of the Commonwealth, there are circumstances about Tanganyika which are particularly encouraging, and not the least is the circumstance with regard to the preparation for it.
I support entirely what the noble Earl said about the wonderful service given by the noble Lord, Lord Twining, and I am quite sure the whole House appreciates the reference that was made by the Minister for the Colonial Office about Lord Twining. He might agree with me that, after my lifetime of service in the Co-operative Movement, I am particularly proud of the development of co-operation in Tanganyika. Sometimes we get quite fantastic remarks and even broad smiles about the Co-operative Movement, but it is the original scheme for its development. Here it stemmed, from William King, in Brighton, perhaps, and Robert Owen.
It is a very great and independent movement in this country to-day, both productive, distributive and financially, and with its own educational system. I am quite proud of the fact that Mr. Kahama, Minister for Home Affairs, was able to get a very substantial part of
740
his education at the Co-operative College at Loughborough in this country, and was able to take qualifications as a member of the Chartered Institute of Secretaries. And I look at the Minister of Agriculture and Cooperative Development, in Tanganyika, at Mr. Paul Bomani, who was educated at Loughborough College and who has had great experience as the general manager of the Victoria Co-operative Union. I think the work that they have already been proved to have done is first class and will be a big factor in the general development of that territory.
The other matter which strikes me is the remarkable way in which native personnel has been available for the high offices in this new country. One wonders from the rather scanty official reports given of even the services rendered by Mr. Nyerere in the last few years, how these persons can have acquired the qualifications, experience and ability which they have now so obviously displayed in Tanganyika. Its Prime Minister is only 38 years of age to-day. He took his final degree at Edinburgh University, and although only 38 has already been in office for a long time in Tanganyika. I should like to pay a great personal tribute to him for the manner in which, at the various stages of the negotiations—on one or two points I think there was a little difficulty—as the noble Earl has said, he nevertheless emerged very satisfactorily in the end.
I am hopeful that not only will they be able to develop on the agricultural lines which have been so often referred to—some of their products now are becoming very well established in the food sense—but that they will also find and develop other resources in this very great country and be fully contributing to the general trade of the world and, I hope particularly, to the prosperity of the nations within our Commonwealth.
One is anxious always, of course, in these territories where there are sudden changes in climatic conditions and such an experience as they have been going through in the last few months from famine. One thing I seem to have missed from the speech of the noble Earl was any reference to the famine

741
which they have been experiencing there and to whether we were doing something to help them. I wonder whether the noble Earl could tell us what are the latest reports in an official sense with regard to that situation. When we learn of the total amount which is going to be spent on the three-year plan of development it sounds very good, and I think that maybe you are underwriting half of that, which will probably become about two-thirds ultimately, in the form of a grant. But immediate suffering among the population from famine, even before they get their independence next month, should mean that we should have been offering something by way of direct assistance already and would continue it as long as was absolutely necessary. Perhaps on these matters the noble Earl would give us some further information, and we hope it will he very good information.
The other thing which I should like to stress is this. I would refer to some of the educational experiences of the leaders in the Government there. I think that the references of the noble Earl to the way in which various educational services have been developed so far and what the hopes were in regard to higher education are very promising and in all these matters I feel sure that the new Government in its state of independence may feel quite certain that the citizens of this country will welcome good news of every part of their present and their hoped for planned developments on these lines, and we pray God's blessing may rest upon them.
3.45 p.m.
THE MARQUESS OF WILLINGDON: My Lords, as the only representative of your Lordships' House at the Arusha Conference in Tanganyika last September I feel, as I believe the noble Earl, Lord Perth, feels with me, that this is a suitable moment to say "thank you", for we were all guests of the Tanganyika Government and this Conference was promoted by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. It included all the African countries south of the Sahara, representatives from the Congo, from South Africa. Nigeria and elsewhere. There were also representatives of international bodies and the guests from Great Britain included such well-
742
known names as Sir Julian Huxley, Professor Pearsall, Dr. Worthington and Dr. Fraser Darling. Furthermore, as the African countries sent their own Ministers it was thought desirable to have zoological and biological students there as well, and therefore we arranged fourteen fellowships for young Africans from Cambridge and from various parts of Africa and I cannot tell you how welcome they were and of the wonderful contributions they made to the Conference.
This Conference opened with an hour's address by His Excellency the Governor on the conservation programme and difficulties in Tanganyika. We believe that certain satisfactory conclusions and programmes were drawn up. The organisation and hospitality of the Tanganyika Government were beyond reproach. There were about 260 delegates and I should like, with your Lordships' permission, to read their proclamation signed by their Prime Minister, the Minister for Legal Affairs, and, a new appointment, the Minister for Lands, Forests and Wild Life, of the Tanganyika Government:
"The survival of our wild life is a matter of grave concern to all of us in Africa. These wild creatures amid the wild places they inhabit are not only important as a source of wonder and inspiration but are an integral part of our natural resources and of our future livelihood and wellbeing. In accepting the trusteeship of our wild life we solemnly declare that we will do everything in our power to make sure that our children's grandchildren will be able to enjoy this rich and precious inheritance. The conservation of wild life and wild places calls for specialist knowledge, trained manpower and money, and we look to other nations to co-operate in this important task, the success or failure of which affects not only the Continent of Africa but the rest of the world as well."
That, my Lords, I believe is right. And I believe I speak on behalf of the delegates of that Conference in wishing Tanganyika, that beautiful country, the great future it deserves.
3.47 p.m.
LORD TWINING: My Lords, this Bill is the latest of a series which have come before your Lordships' House giving Parliamentary approval for the granting of independence to a territory which has been under the administration of the Colonial Office. If I may intrude a personal note for a moment, may I express my gratitude to the noble Earl

743
and to the noble Viscount for the kind things which they said about me which I listened to with embarrassment. Mine was a comparatively easy task compared with a Colonial Governor's today. I was expected only to pursue the consistent policy which had been laid down and endorsed by a succession of Colonial Secretaries. I saw the other day that I was described as the last of the paternal Governors. Well, I am sufficiently old-fashioned not to mind being paternal, although I recognise that the worst feature of it that one is inclined to overlook is the fact that one's children are growing up.
Behind the dry and prosaic language of the Bill is a measure which is going to affect directly the lives of over 9 million people and which can well exert a powerful influence on the course of events in the territories lying to the north and south of Tanganyika. Tanganyika is one of the younger Colonial territories as it has been under British administration for a period of only 42 years. There has in the past been a tendency for its neighbours to look upon it as a poor relation—a large, sprawling and backward country. The achieving of its independence is a reminder to them of the lesson to be learnt from the fable of the tortoise and the hare. But Tanganyika has set an example which can be regarded as a vindication of enlightened British Colonial policy.
In looking back over these years we find three outstanding landmarks. First, the Governorship of Sir Donald Cameron. He was a great Colonial Governor; a far-sighted man and one who had genuine sympathy for the native population for whom he was responsible. Cameron foresaw that Tanganyika would ultimately gain its independence as a predominantly African State. He resisted all kinds of pressures both from within and from without which, if they had succeeded in their aims, would have prevented or at least delayed this goal from being reached. He recognised that although the African population would always out-number those of other races who had made their homes there, it was of vital importance that both Europeans and Asians should be given full opportunity to play their part in the progress and development of the country.
744
It was he who established the harmonious race relations for which Tanganyika has become celebrated. He saw that each race had its role to play, and that to do so there must be a relationship between them that was friendly and co-operative with a natural understanding that would enable them to work together. His successors have been given the credit for the results, but it must be said that it is more difficult to introduce and firmly establish such a policy than to sustain it. Tanganyika owes a lot to Sir Donald Cameron, and it is not surprising that his name is remembered by the people with affection and gratitude.
The second landmark was in 1946 when His Majesty's Government agreed to Tanganyika's becoming a Trust territory under the United Nations Charter with the United Kingdom as the administrating Power. It was written into the trustee agreement that the aim was to bring the territory to the point where it could be granted independence, thus setting a formal seal on a policy which in fact was already being pursued. The succeeding years can best be described as the years of preparation. With generous assistance from His Majesty's Government, and with a consistent policy pursued by Colonial Secretaries from both the Labour and Conservative Parties, great progress was made. This can be illustrated by the fact that in the space of a decade imports and exports and Government revenue increased three-fold, while equally impressive progress was made in education and the other social services.
As the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, has said, the co-operative movement gained impetus and has played a very important part in the economy of the country. It was noteworthy, too, that political, economic and social progress was kept in balance. These results could not have been achieved had it not been for the attitude and the response of the people of Tanganyika of all races, who showed an eagerness to take advantage of every opportunity offered, and also devoted and dedicated work of the Civil Service.
The third landmark was when the present Governor, Sir Richard Turnbull, was able to announce in 1959, some time

745
after the first elections had been held, that the way was clear to the granting of internal self-government to be followed as soon as possible by independence. There were many people at the time who thought that the pace was too fast, but I am quite sure that the decision was a wise and courageous one and that to have tried to go at a slower pace would have jeopardised the good will that existed and would have led to difficulties, if not to disaster.
So in the space of 42 years we have achieved our target and Tanganyika is gaining its independence peacefully and without the recriminations and troubles which have unfortunately been experienced in some other Colonial territories. A great deal of the credit for this satisfactory situation must be given to Mr. Julius Nyerere, who is the undisputed national leader. He is a good Christian, a man of high principles and strong convictions, who has shown himself not only to be an outstanding political leader but also to be a statesman. One of his achievements has been to preserve the tribal system, which is still strong in Tanganyika and which means so much to the ordinary African in his day-to-day life. But he has done this without allowing it to become a power in national politics. A lesser man could not have recognised the part still to be played in the life and prosperity of the country by non-Africans.
He has had the courage publicly to announce and reassure Europeans and Asians that their land titles will be respected and that their position will be secure. A characteristic act was for him to write a personal letter to the British administrative officers asking them to stay on and help with the tasks which Tanganyika has to face. While he is a passionate nationalist, he is prepared to subordinate Tanganyika to being an equal partner in the greater conception of a Federation of East Africa, which would include other, neighbouring territories. We must not necessarily expect him slavishly to follow the Westminster model, because that is not what the people want; they want to develop their own parliamentary institutions suitable for their own circumstances. We must watch this with sympathy and not with condemnation.
My Lords, Tanganyika is going to need a great deal of assistance both in
746
money and in technical staff during the next few years, and it is satisfactory to note that Her Majesty's Government, despite the present economic difficulties at home, have agreed to give generous assistance towards the carrying out of its new three-year development plan. I hope Tanganyika will continue to receive its fair share of any further aid that can be made available from this country. On January 9 Tanganyika will enter upon a new chapter of its history as a sovereign State, and it is gratifying to know that she has applied for membership of the British Commonwealth of Nations. All of us who know the country and its people will wish them well, and I am sure that they will receive the good wishes of your Lordships' House.
3.58 p.m.
THE EARL OF SWINTON: My Lords, as one of the old Secretaries of State who initiated, or at any rate followed on with, the policy which the noble Lord, Lord Twining, has spoken of, and who fully appreciated Cameron as a Governor, indeed promoted him to an even higher governorship, I should like to add my congratulations and good wishes. Under the sympathetic guidance of Lord Twining and his successor, and under the steady leadership of Mr. Julius Nyerere, this ship of state has sailed smoothly into the haven of independence. When someone once said to George II that General Wolfe was mad the King answered, "Then I wish he would bite some of the other generals". It might be a happy accident if Mr. Nyerere could infect some other African leaders with his qualities of wisdom and tolerance and understanding. We all wish the new State well.
I should like to associate myself with what the noble Viscount, the Leader of the Opposition, said: it is an unfortunate thing that just as Tanganyika attains independence it does so under the shadow of famine in at least one of its provinces, and I am sure the Government, who are so very generous, and wisely generous, in the financial help which, in co-operation with the World Bank, they are going to give to the new State, will not hesitate to give as a dowry, now or in advance of the marriage of Tanganyika as a full member of the Commonwealth, help to deal with the famine.
I am sure that under Mr. Nyerere we can be certain that the administration

747
will be wise. It is good, also, to note that the common services which have been very useful indeed, in fact indispensable, in the East African territories—communications, customs and the like—will go on under a co-operative undertaking which has been freely and willingly negotiated. It may be that some day in the future that co-operation will extend into wider fields and we may see a Federation of East Africa come into being. That is the kind of thing that cannot be rushed and cannot come artificially, but it is good to think that at any rate in the Prime Minister of Tanganyika there will be a man statesmanlike and wise in timing and quick to seize opportunities.
I was delighted to hear Lord Twining say what he did about Mr. Nyerere's development of the tribal system and that it may be—indeed, I trust it will be—that in Tanganyika they will develop their own constitutional system. It is not necessarily a wise thing to try to export into African States in its entirety and with every particular the Westminster model. It is easy to give a Constitution; but Constitutions work only if the people have the characteristics which enable those Constitutions to be successful. Certainly the Westminster model depends for its operation on qualities which are second nature to ourselves, and not the least of which is tolerance and freedom of speech, and the independence of Parties. If Tanganyika develops on its own lines, so much the better. But under the training that it has had, and under the leaderships which, in independence, it will now enjoy, we can give it not only our good wishes but all our confidence that it will be successful in the future.
4.2 p.m.
LORD MILVERTON: My Lords, in rising to make a brief contribution to this debate, I do not propose to go into any detail about what has already been better said; but I thought that as an old member of the Colonial Service I should like to take this opportunity of congratulating Lord Twining upon the achievement the foundation for which was laid by his nine or ten years of able and successful governorship, in which, I may add, he was noticeably assisted by Lady Twining, who did such wonderful work in the important realm
748
of women's welfare in that country. The coping stone of this work has been ably laid by Lord Twining's successor, Sir Richard Turnbull, the present Governor, who has recently had that mark of appreciation from Mr. Nyerere of being recommended by him, or asked for by him, as the first Governor-General of the independent State.
Of the Prime Minister, Mr. Julius Nyerere, one can say, with support from everyone, that Tanganyika is fortunate to have at the helm an African of such outstanding ability, of such courage, integrity and optimism. He faces a heavy burden—do not let us forget that—of responsibility in which he is supported by the invaluable financial advice of Sir Ernest Vasey. It is good news that the activities of the East Africa High Commission are to be preserved in the form of the African Common Services Organisation. It will perhaps serve as a focus for wider economic and political integration, and will give it time to develop.
I am aware of the dreams of federation with neighbouring territories, but I suggest that all these territories have urgent internal problems to settle first—problems which increased size might only magnify. It seems to me that in that relation the motto "More haste, less speed" would be a good one to remember. The size of Tanganyika is comparable with that of Nigeria, and it has about one-quarter of Nigeria's population; much of Tanganyika is largely undeveloped, and faces in acute form the problems of famine, health and disease, and poverty. In the administrative, educational and financial spheres, difficulties loom largely and must be fairly recognised.
Mr. Nyerere carries with him, I am sure, our warmest good wishes and a willingness to give all possible help. After all, independence, per se, is only a name; it means uninhibited freedom to face the practical difficulties of life alone. The responsibilities of life begin at that period. Indeed, independence is only a beginning and not an end. There has been a perilously short time between the internal self-government and independence. I was talking the other day to one of the Nigerian Ministers, who said to me that, in his view, in Nigeria the period between internal self-government and full independence had

749
been just about right—not too fast and not too slow. In his country the time of specific preparation for independence was about ten years, and in economic development and in the presence of capable leaders and trained personnel, for various reasons arising from her circumstances of the past, Nigeria was far better equipped than most other countries have been.
The noble Earl, Lord Perth, said how much financial assistance would be given to this newly independent territory. But I suggest that there is one thing that even money cannot buy or produce in too short a time, and that is personnel. I mention this point not in any spirit of depreciation, but, on the contrary, to enhance the appreciation of Mr. Nyerere, and to give added value to our hope that he will succeed in bringing progress and prosperity to his people. We wish him well in his onerous and honourable task. But, in the middle of all these good wishes, do not let us forget the immensity of the task which faces him. Inevitably, when a country becomes independent, as in this case, the leader is subjected to great pressure to Africanise key positions in the country. That, of course, is a natural and a good thing, if there are Africans available and able to do the work. That is why I stressed the point that the educational period in preparation for independence has been, in this case, rather short to provide adequate personnel who are trained and experienced leaders. As I have said, we wish Mr. Nyerere very possible success. If any man in Africa can succeed in this task, I feel that he can.
4.10 p.m.
LORD COLYTON: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Willingdon has asked me to express to your Lordships, and in particular to my noble friend the Minister of State, his regret that he is unable to remain to the end of this debate owing to a long-standing engagement. My Lords, I should like this afternoon to welcome this Bill, and to add my good wishes to those which have been expressed on all sides by noble Lords, to the Government and the people of Tanganyika on their impending independence. It has often been remarked, and has been said again here this afternoon, quite rightly, that Tanganyika is an outstanding example of orderly progress from Colonial status to full independence.
750
For this, we have to thank a number of factors. I suppose some people might argue that the position of Tanganyika, first as mandated Territory under the League of Nations and, secondly, as a Trust Territory under the United Nations, has put her at an advantage. Although I would be the last to minimise the part which the United Nations and, in particular, the Trusteeship Council and the Fourth Committee have played in furthering the constitutional progress of Tanganyika, I would doubt whether this is really an important factor.
In the first place, I think I would give the credit to the Tanganyika people themselves. They are a happy people; they get on well with one another; and although, of course, there are many tribes, tribal rivalries have been conspicuously absent. Further—and this is most important—they are mainly all of one race, the Bantu race. This is, of course, in striking contrast with the neighbouring Colony of Kenya where there are Bantu tribes, Nilotic tribes, Hamitic tribes, Somalis and others. In the second place, I would observe that, as has been said before, Tanganyika has been remarkably lucky in having a very distinguished series of Colonial Governors, going right back to Sir Donald Cameron.
If I may say so, it has been particularly fortunate, as has been said by other noble Lords, in its last two Governors who had to cover this most critical period—these two oustanding men, my noble friend Lord Twining, and the present Governor, Sir Richard Turnbull. Lord Twining's work of nearly nine years requires no commendation fom me. We are very fortunate indeed to have him here and to have his notable contributions to our debates on Colonial affairs. The present Governor, through his personal relationship with Mr. Julius Nyerere, has also played a most outstanding part. I think it is safe to say that without his wise guidance and understanding the orderly advance of Tanganyika to independence could certainly not have been so easily achieved, and we are all delighted that he is now going to continue his work in a different rôle.
Thirdly, of course, there is the personality of Mr. Nyerere himself, to whom many references have been made this

751
afternoon. He is an oustanding leader with broad ideas and remarkable vision. I feel quite certain, my Lords, that the fact that he is a devoutly religious man has played an important part in enabling him to deal with these many problems that he has had to face, and in particular to reconcile the varying interests of the different races in Tanganyika. I have no doubt that he will find the need for all his great qualities in facing the future under independence. Economic difficulties, personal political rivalries, and many other problems are bound to arise to test his judgment, his skill and his courage. But I feel sure that what we have learnt of Mr. Nyerere in the past will lead us all to believe that he will succeed in his task, and I know that he will have the good wishes and support of Members of this House in so doing.
Lastly, my Lords, I should like to refer to the work of the Civil Service in Tanganyika which has done so much to contribute to the development of the country and to good will among the different races. When I was out in the Territory about a year ago, it was estimated that only some 30 per cent. of the expatriate British civil servants would stay on after independence, and I was very happy to learn this afternoon from my noble friend that this figure is now expected to be as high as 80 per cent. It is a remarkable tribute to the confidence which expatriate members of the Civil Service have in Mr. Nyerere's leadership. It is also I think a tribute to the Overseas Services Aid Scheme, to which reference was made by my noble friend. At the same time, my Lords, it seems to me a little ironic that we should now be asked at the Security Council to support the United Nations in chasing out the remaining Belgian civilian advisers in Katanga, who did so much for Katanga and for the rest of the Congo.
My Lords, I noticed that when this Bill was having its Second Reading in another place a Member of the Opposition chose to taunt the Conservative Party for not having learnt the lessons of Tanganyika, and suggested that the present happy situation there was the result of implementing the policy of "one man, one vote". He used this as an argument for abandoning what he described as "fancy franchises" for delaying constitutional advance, the impli-
752
cation being that no such "fancy franchise" had ever existed in Tanganyika. Now that, of course, was by no means the case. Under the Constitutions of April, 1955, and again of December, 1957, there was separate representation for the three main races, and each voter was called upon to vote for three candidates. Moreover, the franchise was, of course, qualitative. This happened to be the system which worked well in Tanganyika. That does not mean that it would be effective in other Territories with quite different and far more complicated problems. But it was, if you like it, a "fancy franchise" which had to be gone through before the system of "one man, one vote" could work.
My Lords, I noticed that this Bill contains one feature that is not to be found in previous Independence Bills which have been brought before this House. This is the provision in Clause 4 (3) under which financial assistance under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act is to be continued after the independence of Tanganyika in the case of the common services which are shared with Kenya and Uganda. This is, of course, as my noble friend, has said, a result of the successful Conference at Lancaster House last June, whereby these services—after the independence of Tanganyika and until the independence of the other two Territories is attained—are to be administered by the new East Africa Common Services Organisation, which will come into force after the independence of Tanganyika. As I think has been said before, we all hope that this common administration will form the basis for a future Federation of East Africa. In the meantime, it is certainly very satisfactory that Tanganyika will continue to enjoy financial assistance from the United Kingdom, in regard to the very large field of services which are included under the common services.
From a reply which my honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies gave in another place on the Committee stage of this Bill, I understand that there is another exceptional arrangement, although it does not figure in the Bill, which will provide for new development by the Colonial Development Corporation in Tanganyika after independence. The amount involved is not large, only about £750,000, but the provision for new investment in Tanganyika

753
by the C.D.C. after independence appears to me to be a first breach in the policy of precluding the C.D.C. from embarking on new projects in a Colonial territory once it has attained its independence. This is something which many of us have for some time been advocating without any success on both sides of the House. It is good news that this advance has now been made, and I hope that it means that the Government are seriously considering a revision of their previous policy, so that a reconstituted Colonial Development Corporation, possibly under the name of the Commonwealth Development Corporation, will be enabled not only to continue existing projects in the newly independent territories, but to embark on further activities. As I have said before in this House, my Lords, the C.D.C. is something which the political leaders of the emergent territories know, which they understand, which carries no strings with it and which will, therefore, not be misrepresented by external critics as neo-Colonialism.
In conclusion, my Lords, I should like to add one word to what has been said by other noble Lords, about the need for Her Majesty's Government to make some special contribution to Tanganyika—perhaps in the form of a birth-clay present or, as my noble friend said, a dowry on the occasion of her independence—to help with the tragic famine with which she is confronted. Much has already been done by the United States Government in providing gifts of food, but the great difficulty, as I understand it, is one of distribution. That is what is going to cost money—altogether, I believe, between £1 million and £2 million. It seems unfair that the newly-independent Tanganyikan Government should be saddled with this additional burden to be paid out of the funds which we have already allocated. I would ask my noble friend if, when he replies to this debate, he cannot give us some hope that the Government will be willing to make available a substantial sum—I should like to see not less than £1 million—to be offered immediately to the Government of Tanganyika for the purposes of famine relief. Finally, my Lords, I welcome this Bill, and I welcome the opportunity which it gives in this House to send to the Prime Minister, to the Government and to all the people of Tanganyika, on this great occasion of
754
their independence, a warm message of affection and good wishes for the future.
4.21 p.m.
LORD FARINGDON: My Lords, I had not intended to intervene in this debate, but I must rise to say three sentences in support of the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Colyton, of the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, and of my noble Leader in connection with the existing famine in Tanganyika. It seemed to me that the speech of the noble Earl (if he will forgive me for being critical) was lacking in reality, having no reference to the prevailing conditions. Indeed, that it has not been mentioned more in your Lordships' House seems to me to be evidence that your Lordships are inadequately informed as to the severity of the famine in Tanganyika at this moment. The conditions are such that thousands of people are being kept alive, and barely alive, only by the generosity of the United States Government. Generous subscriptions have been sent from this country, but the situation is such that no private endeavour can possibly deal with it. I hope that Her Majesty's Government will see their way clear—will see it, indeed, as their duty—to send substantial aid to these people at the time when they are gaining their independence.
May I just add one word about the Prime Minister of Tanganyika? I have the honour to have the acquaintance of Mr. Nyerere, and, like everybody else who has that honour, I regard it not only as an honour but as a pleasure. He is one for whom one can have both a public admiration and a private affection. I think the people of Tanganyika—and here I would disagree with the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, because I think that independence is not an arriving in harbour but rather a setting out upon oceans—in setting out upon their travels, are fortunate in their pilot.
LORD REA: My Lords, I would apologise for not being in my place earlier during this debate, but from these Benches I should like to extend a welcome to this Bill and to send our very good wishes to those concerned. I hope it will be borne in mind that there are special dangers in that district at the moment, geographical and physical and I hope that the people of Tanganyika will survive them, with prosperity and happiness.
4.23 p.m.
THE EARL OF PERTH: My Lords, all your Lordships who have spoken in this debate on the Second Reading of this Bill have not only welcomed it but have paid tribute to the people of Tanganyika and, in particular, to its Prime Minister, Mr. Julius Nyerere—and that, I am sure, is in no way a surprise. May I try to deal with one or two points which have been raised by noble Lords? Perhaps first and foremost I should touch upon this question of the tragic famine which the country is suffering at the present time—as, indeed, is her neighbour, Kenya. Now not only have the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, and the noble Lords, Lord Colyton, Lord Faringdon and Lord Rea, all touched upon it, but, of course, it is something which is of great concern to us all. But let us see what the exact problem is.
The exact problem, so far as Tanganyika is concerned, is not one of, for example, foodstuffs. Largely thanks to the generosity of the United States of America, there is a sufficiency of foodstuffs at the moment. But the problem is the distribution of these foodstuffs—getting them to the right place. That, of course, is both expensive and difficult. On this question of distribution, it has been estimated that the total cost may be anything up to, I think, £1 million. Again, what does this mean? It means that if this is the sort of amount which is needed both for distribution purposes and for relief measures in general, that amount of money will not be available to the Tanganyika Government for the development programme or for other purposes over the next years. My Lords, as I have already indicated, we have underwritten no less than a half of that programme, and of that underwriting very nearly £9 million has been in grant. I think, therefore, that we must recognise that, in a sense, our help has been what it has, whether it has been in cash as opposed to in kind; and that it is difficult for Her Majesty's Government, under these present conditions, about which we all know, to consider anything further when we have done so much and when, if I may put it in this way, the money is already there.
I know that a Parliamentary delegation have come to my right honourable
756
friend and have put forward their case, and that will shortly be answered by my right honourable friend; but I think it is important to give this additional background. Having said that, I would add that, as your Lordships know, there is also, of course—and this is most important—an appeal to private individuals and others to provide funds, and perhaps other things also, for the help of those suffering because of this disaster. I feel sure that the response to that will be both generous and ready. I have tried to put forward clearly just what is the position in regard to it, and now, if I may, I will turn to one or two other points that have been raised.
The noble Lord, Lord Twining, and the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, both touched on the fact that in Tanganyika, perhaps—as, indeed, in certain other African territories—the Westminster model of Parliament may be adapted to their own requirements and their own spirit. I would certainly say that that seems to me to be an eminently likely and, indeed, reasonable course, provided that two things are remembered in the adaptation. One is that the judiciary must remain independent, and the other is that the rights of the individual and his freedom are safeguarded. So long as those things (which I believe are well known and deeply engraved on the hearts of the Tanganyika Government) are sustained, any variation is not something which should cause us concern.
The noble Lord, Lord Milverton, touched on the great importance, quite apart from money, of personnel. Of course, this is both right and essential. We have always had that in mind, as I outlined when I spoke earlier. It gives great satisfaction to know that so many of the existing overseas civil servants are ready to stay if wanted during the difficult period of transition. Again, I would recall that we have our Department of Technical Co-operation, ready to give what help may be needed if asked on that side, which is, of course, of such importance to the future of the country. The noble Lord, Lord Colyton, touched on the Colonial Development Corporation. I would not want him to read too much into what may have been given as a reply, in the sense that some new policy has been initiated by a back door—because, of course, we do not do that. If

757
we are going to bring in something new, we will do it more directly. What has happened is that we have said, in regard to Tanganyika, that the same sort of pattern may be followed as has been followed in several other of the independent territories. I recall particularly Nigeria and, recently, Sierra Leone, where there has been a development corporation formed just before the country's independence. We have agreed that a considerable sum of money shall be made available from this country for the development corporation, which quite clearly will not in fact be spent until after the country has become independent. I have touched upon that because I would not want there to be any misunderstanding or thought that in some way something quite new was afoot. I very much remember the debate of last summer in your Lordships' House on the Colonial Development Corporation, and studying the points that were raised at that time.
My Lords, in conclusion, I think I would recall what the Prime Minister, Mr. Julius Nyerere, said at the end of the March conference at Dar-es-Salaam, which settled the first date of independence for Tanganyika. I say the first date "because your Lordships will recall that at that time it was to be December 28 or 29, and subsequently it was put forward to an earlier date, because the former date was so awkward from many people's points of view. He said at that time:
"We will make nothing of Tanganyika, and we will set no example to the world, unless it be by the renewed efforts of hard work of ourselves and of kindness towards others."
A Prime Minister who at a moment of celebration and jubilation can say those things, not only about the hard work of his people but about kindness towards others, gives us, I feel, ground for confidence not only in him but in his people. I would say that, for our part, we, will continue to do all that is asked of us to try to help them in their going forward. The real tribute is to them. We can be proud of the part we have played, and of the part our Governors and our civil servants have played, in helping the country forward over these last 40 years, whether it has been as a mandate or as a Trust. But, in the last analysis,
758
our success is the success of the inhabitants and the people of that country, and I know that I speak for all your Lordships when I wish them good fortune and happiness.
SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear!
On Question, Bill read 2a Committee negatived.

SOUTHERN RHODESIA (CONSTITUTION) BILL
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.34 p.m.
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, I have it in Command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Southern Rhodesia (Constitution) Bill, has consented to place Her Majesty's prerogative and interest, so far as they are affected by the Bill, at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a Second time. In doing so it may be helpful if I give a brief resume of the events leading up to the introduction of the Bill. The Constitution under which Southern Rhodesia is at present governed was granted by the Sovereign in 1923 by Letters Patent. This Constitution has been amended from time to time, but its general features have remained unchanged. At the pace of events in Africa, this is a long time for a Constitution to last, and the desire for a change which became evident in 1959, when the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia opened the question of a revision with Her Majesty's Government, was entirely natural. The desire to change sprang from two different sources, and for different reasons. The Government, representing the electorate, felt that the time had come when the powers reserved to the Secretary of State—and, my Lords, I shall come back to these later—should be removed, and the full responsibility for the government of the Colony outside the federal sphere should be laid in theory where it had lain in practice for so long.

759
At the same time, an awakening of political consciousness among the Africans, stemming partly from educational and economic progress, and partly, no doubt, from knowledge of events elsewhere in Africa, had led to the legitimate and understandable desire on the part of some Africans for an increased share in the government of their country, and, on the part of those who took an extreme view, for the immediate transfer of all power to African hands.
I should like to make it clear at this point, my Lords, that there is no single African viewpoint. There are many Africans who recognise that the future prosperity of their country lies in close co-operation between the races. There are, of course, many others who have responded to the more emotional appeal of "one man, one vote", without stopping to reflect on the consequences.
My Lords, I feel you would not wish me to give a round-by-round account of the negotiations and conferences which have taken place since 1959, but it may be useful if I sketch in the essential background. There were discussions between the Secretary of State and Sir Edgar Whitehead in 1959, and again in 1960. It was at the conclusion of the discussions in the spring of 1960 that the British Government defined their attitude to the withdrawal of the reserved powers in the following terms—and I quote from a speech by the then Minister of State, Mr. Alport (as he then was), in another place [OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons. Vol. 623, col. 31]:
"The United Kingdom Government stated that their ability to accept a scheme which would reduce or withdraw the powers vested in the Secretary of State in relation to the Southern Rhodesia Constitution would depend on whether arrangements could be devised and agreed by both Governments which would provide effective alternative safeguards, particularly in respect of discriminatory legislation and land rights, and in respect of amendment of the Constitution."
Previously, on February 18, 1960, the Prime Minister had given, also in another place, an assurance that [OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons, Vol. 617, col. 1417]:
"in the event of any change being made in the Constitution of Southern Rhodesia, the interest of Africans would of course be given full weight".
760
These, then, my Lords, are the pledges; to give African interests full weight and not to withdraw the reserved powers in the absence of fully effective alternative safeguards. I hope to demonstrate shortly how completely they are to be fulfilled in the Constitution which it is proposed to recommend to Her Majesty to grant under the powers which this Bill is destined to confer upon Her.
But before coming on to that, I should perhaps refer to the later stages in the discussions between the Governments of Southern Rhodesia and Britain. In December, 1960, and January, 1961, a constitutional conference was held, first in London, and later in Salisbury, to discuss these matters. Although there had been many previous exchanges between the Governments concerned, this was in no way (what shall I say?) a "rubber stamp" conference. All Parties in Southern Rhodesia were represented—European, African and multi-racial: and there were also representatives of the Chiefs and of the Asian and coloured communities. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations took the Chair. The outcome of the Conference was a Report, published as a White Paper (Cmnd. 1291). To this, all those represented at the conference subscribed, with the exception of the Dominion Party delegates, who dissociated themselves from it. Subsequently, as your Lordships are aware, the delegates of the National Democratic Party indicated that they were no longer prepared to support the Conference recommendations.
The main features of the Report were these. A new Constitution would include a Declaration of Rights to be enjoyed by the people of Southern Rhodesia. This would prescribe the fundamental rights and freedoms to be enjoyed without distinction of race, colour or creed. Any law—including subsidiary legislation—passed after the enactment of the new Constitution, which contravened the provisions of the Declaration of Rights, would be invalid. Thus it would be open to any person who considered himself to be adversely affected by a law which, in his opinion, contravened the Declaration of Rights, to question its validity in the courts. It was agreed that arrangements should be made to ensure an ultimate right of appeal in such cases to the Privy Council. The costs of such an appeal

761
could be borne by public funds at the discretion of the Constitutional Council.
It was agreed that a Constitutional Council should be set up, with the duty of examining Bills between their passage by the Legislative Assembly and their submission to the Governor for Assent, with a view to advising the Assembly as to whether they contravened the Declaration of Rights. In such an event the Council would have powers to delay the passage of such Bills for six months unless they were confirmed by the Assembly by a two-thirds majority. I feel that perhaps I should make it clear that this procedure was not intended to be a substitute for the courts, but an additional safeguard of human rights.
The other major feature of the Constitution was the arrangements for representation and franchise. It was not possible, in regard to this, to find a solution which satisfied everyone. This was, perhaps, hardly surprising. Nevertheless, all groups at the time of the Conference—except, of course, the Dominion Party—considered that a scheme which was set out in the White Paper should be introduced. It is a fair assumption that all who subscribed to this felt it to be the best that could be achieved in the circumstances and agreed to its introduction without prejudice to their principles.
The scheme, which I shall describe only briefly, since it is fully set out in the White Papers (Cmnd. 1399 and 1400), which have been published, is for fifty "A" roll constituencies, and fifteen "B" roll electoral districts to be delimited, covering the whole country in each case. Each would elect one member of the Legislative Assembly. Voters would register on two rolls—those with the higher qualifications on the "A" roll and those with the lower on the "B" roll. The qualifications for both rolls are set out in the White Paper (Cmnd. 1399). All voters would vote in both their constituency and electoral district elections; but, in the "A" roll constituencies, "B" roll votes, if the number cast were more than one-quarter of the "A" roll votes cast, would be proportionately reduced, to a figure equivalent to one-quarter of the "A" roll votes; and vice versa in the electoral districts.
Lastly, any amendment of the Constitution would rest with Southern Rhodesia, except for certain matters
762
concerning only the position of the Crown and the Governor in regard to which the power of amendment would be reserved to the Queen. The procedure for amendment would, however, be hedged in with powerful safeguards including, in respect of the basic clauses, such as the Declaration of Rights, the Constitutional Council and the Judiciary, a requirement that an amending Bill would need to be endorsed by a referendum, at which the four racial groups would vote separately and which could endorse the Bill only if each racial group's votes showed a majority in favour.
The Conference was agreed that such provisions in the Constitution provided safeguards fully as effective as those at present afforded by the powers reserved to the British Government; and the Secretary of State agreed to recommend the elimination of the reserve powers vested in himself. These, then, are the bare bones of the Constitution which it is proposed to advise the Queen to grant under the powers this Bill would confer. They more than fulfil the pledges to which I referred earlier. The safeguards are fully as effective. Indeed, I believe that a written Declaration of Rights, enforced by the courts, to whom any individual of any race can look for redress, will be more effective than the purely negative reserved powers, which have never been exercised by any British Government.
African interests have been taken fully into account. Under the workings of the present Constitution, no African has so far reached the Legislative Assembly, though there is no bar. Now, Africans should, at the first General Election under the new Constitution, win all fifteen "B" roll seats and, perhaps, one or two "A" roll seats; and, if they seize the opportunities which this Constitution offers they will be able to exercise an influence on the other "A" roll seats which no candidate of any Party will be able to afford to ignore.
No one doubts that, under this Constitution and by virtue of their greater numbers, the predominance in the political direction of Southern Rhodesia will pass progressively into African hands. We hope that, before that stage is reached, the political divisions in Southern Rhodesia will cut right across racial boundaries. They do so to some

763
extent already, and there are signs that the multi-racial parties are in fact becoming more evenly based on both races.
May I now say a brief word about the Bill itself, and the necessity for it? Clause 1 (1) of the Bill confers on Her Majesty the power to grant a new Constitution by Order in Council. This is necessary because the Letters Patent, made in exercise of the Royal Prerogative in 1923, conferred upon the Southern Rhodesia Legislature the power to amend all but twelve of the clauses of the Constitution. By so doing, the Crown is considered to have divested itself of the prerogative power to legislate in regard to any part of the Constitution, except those twelve clauses. It would, of course, have been possible for the present Constitution to have been amended, in part by the Southern Rhodesia Legislature, and in part by Her Majesty by Letters Patent; but, since hardly a single section would have been left unchanged—even though the substance of a good many is to be retained—this was considered to be impracticable, and the Southern Rhodesia Government requested, and the British Government agreed, that the consent of Parliament be sought for the grant of a completely new instrument.
Your Lordships will observe the reference to extra-territorial legislation in Clause 1 (1). This is a legal matter upon which your Lordships will not expect me, a layman, to deliver a learned lecture. But for the benefit of other noble lay Lords present, it may be helpful if I say that I have ascertained that the object is to make it clear that laws of Southern Rhodesia may, by Act of the Southern Rhodesia Legislature, be applied, in Southern Rhodesia, to acts and omissions committed abroad by persons who belong to Southern Rhodesia, when they return home.
Clause 1 (2) deals with the future amendment of any new Constitution granted under the powers conferred by this Bill. Some provisions of the Constitution, those relating to the position of the Sovereign and the Governor, will be amendable only by the Sovereign by Order-in-Council. All the remainder will be amendable by a two-thirds majority of the Legislative Assembly, subject to the powerful additional safeguard, in the case
764
of certain essential provisions, as set out in paragraph 77 of Cmnd. 1400, that thereafter a referendum will have to be conducted separately among the four racial groups.
I should explain at this point that, in order to obviate the necessity of going through the cumbersome referendum procedure in the case of minor textual amendments to the sections thus specially entrenched, an alternative to the referendum will be Her Majesty's consent, given on the advice of Her British Ministers, who will retain full discretion to refuse to decide the matter if they consider that it is one which should go to a referendum.
Clause 1 (3) brings any amending Orders made under the powers retained under Clause 1 (2), within the scope of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946, and subjects them to the requirements as regards laying before Parliament, et cetera, which that Act lays down. Clause 1 (4) provides for any Order made under this Bill, when it has been enacted, to be laid before Parliament after being made. This brings it into line with Constitutions granted under the British Settlements and Foreign Jurisdiction Acts and with the accepted practice that the principles of new Constitutions for dependent territories are published as White Papers, which may be debated as such, but that the actual Constitutional Instrument itself is not debated in Parliament.
If I may sum up briefly, the Bill would enable Her Majesty to grant by Order-in-Council a new Constitution for Southern Rhodesia which will replace the reserved powers—except in respect of certain vestigial remains, to which I have referred—with locally-based safeguards of greater effectiveness. Further, it will give Africans an opportunity to associate themselves more and more with the political direction of their country. I believe the Constitution will offer the people of Southern Rhodesia an opportunity to do great things in co-operation with each other. The British Government hope that all men of all races in Southern Rhodesia will grasp this opportunity, not as Europeans, or Africans, or Asians, but as Southern Rhodesians. I warmly recommend this Bill to your Lordships. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a. —(The Duke of Devonshire.)
4.55 p.m.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, it is a momentous step that your Lordships are being asked to take this afternoon, because this is a measure that we hope will ensure the orderly development of a multi-racial State in Africa—I think it is the first case of its kind—with nearly 250,000 European inhabitants and nearly 3 million Africans, with Asian and Coloured communities as well. We must obviously have that in mind and speak with a sense of responsibility. I am sorry therefore to have to say that my noble friends and I do not feel satisfied that the Bill meets the needs of the situation in two particular cases. One is that of the safeguards to replace the reserve powers that have been in the hands of Her Majesty's Government since 1923; and the other is the amount of representation in the Legislature allotted to the Africans.
But, first of all, let me give credit where credit is due. I think it should be said quite plainly that in recent years, as old Rhodesians will recognise, there has been a really spectacular change in opinion in Rhodesia. Opinion among the Europeans has moved a long way, and there are signs of a new spirit which accepts the African inhabitants of the country as fellow citizens. That is something quite revolutionary in Rhodesian climate of opinion. So one must give credit for that to Sir Edgar Whitehead and the other leaders of opinion in Southern Rhodesia.
But one must, at the same time, ask whether the rate of change is fast enough. As the noble Duke said, with the means of communication that there are at present, Africans in Rhodesia know all about what is happening in the rest of the continent. They have seen independence given to other African territories—former French, Belgian, British and Italian territories—and there is some impatience among the Rhodesian Africans. Moreover, there is another factor that is not working in the right direction. There have been discrepancies, inconsistencies or even contradictions in some of the public statements of different political leaders in Rhodesia. There have been statements like that of the Minister of Labour and Social Welfare sonic months ago, when he said that the problems of the community
766
"…should be approached on a non-racial basis. One of the major factors responsible for discrimination in Rhodesia was the attitude of many proprietors of hotels, cinemas and restaurants. Parliament should appeal to these proprietors to give all respectable people, regardless of colour, equal consideration."
Many admirable statements have been made by Ministers, the Prime Minister, and others, but then in between these statements there have been some of a very different kind, designed to assure the European population that really they have nothing to fear; that the powers remaining are ample to prevent the pace of African advance getting out of hand, and so on. There have been these contradictory statements and, of course, it is only natural that in the minds of Africans more prominence is given to the statements unfavourable to them than to those which are favourable. That is the factor that has worked in the contrary direction.
Then there have been the former discriminatory measures, both social and legislative, which are only very slowly being removed. We must remember the Monckton Report. Only a year or two ago, we remember those two chapters, one on the removal of racial discrimination, and one on safeguards. Your Lordships remember that the Report said:
"…no new form of association is likely to succeed unless Southern Rhodesia is willing to make drastic changes in its racial policies. We recognise that much progress has lately been made in this direction…But what has been done, however good, is not enough, if the fears which have bedevilled Federation are to be allayed."
Then they go on to specify some of the directions in which discrimination against Africans was most acutely felt, and of course, the pass laws were one. I know there have been changes in the pass laws and in the legislation which have been much talked about, and the world is well aware that there have been changes. But do they amount, in fact, to anything very much, or is their effect so far felt only by a very small minority of Africans? I suspect that the progress in removing the pass laws is still very slow.
Then there was, in urban local government, the complaint that voting for municipal councils was limited to ratepayers. We know also that there

767
has been a change there. Only recently the Salisbury Municipal Council decided on changes which will result in some 8,000 Africans having a vote for the municipal council in, I think, Harare. That is certainly something; it is a step in the right direction. But is it going to be followed in all the other cities of Rhodesia?
There was also the question of limitations of promotion of Africans in the public services. We have certainly read that there have been great changes, and that the way has been opened to Africans to rise to positions of considerable responsibility in the public services. But how many Africans have attained commissioned rank in the Defence Forces? Have Africans been recruited for any of the non-Regular Forces? I know there are African-manned regiments of the Regular Army, but the Territorial forces, so far as I know, are exclusively European. As they have to be used very often in cases of civil disturbance, or in cases of emergency, a situation arises which is likely to cause fear and suspicion among Africans.
Next there is the Land Apportionment Act, which the Monckton Commission said is regarded by Africans as a major discriminatory measure. The Southern Rhodesian Government realised that, and appointed a Select Committee which reported a year ago. They made a number of recommendations which, if they had been implemented, would have done a good deal to allay anxiety and dissatisfaction. But I think we should be assured that steps really have been taken, because the surest way of arousing and fomenting suspicion is, of course, if one thing is said officially and publicly but the actions of the Government do not take it up.
Then there is the question of safeguards, and this is the biggest thing about the Bill—that it abandons the reserve powers that the United Kingdom Government have had ever since the Constitution was given in 1923. Of course, it is known that those powers have never been invoked. It is also said that the presence of those powers has influenced the Southern Rhodesian Government over the years in abstaining from any discriminatory measures which would have called down the reserve
768
powers. You can look at it either way. To replace them, the noble Duke referred to an observation of the Prime Minister, who said that effective alternative safeguards must be provided. Are these effective? The two safeguards seem to me to be the Declaration of Rights and the Constitutional Council. The noble Duke said that the power to appeal to the courts over the Declaration of Rights was a complete safeguard. So it would be, if the Declaration of Rights itself was not so riddled with exceptions and qualifications. I will not go into it in detail. The particular exceptions were discussed thoroughly in another place. But the existence of all those exceptions seems to us to invalidate the whole idea of the Declaration as a safeguard for individuals and, of course, the Declaration is not retrospective; it applies only to legislation passed after the date of this Constitution.
As to the Constitutional Council, there again that is only advisory—it has advisory powers. Any action on its recommendations depends on the Legislature backing it by a two-thirds majority. There has been an unhappy experience already with the safeguard in the Federal Constitution for the African Affairs Board. The only recommendation they made was turned down. Is this going to be any better when there is a built-in majority for the Government, comfortably more than the two-thirds, which could be used to negative any recommendations by the Constitutional Council?
That brings us to the representation and the franchise. The noble Duke said that all the fifteen "B" roll seats would inevitably go to Africans and possibly —or did he say probably?—one or two of the "A" roll seats as well. That may be so; but the fifty non-African seats represent a sizeable majority over and above two-thirds and it may be quite a long time before sufficient of the "A" roll seats change their representation and elect Africans.
However, I think the Government pinned their faith to the gradual disappearance of racial feeling and its replacement by division on normal political grounds regardless of colour. We all hope that that will take place, but surely that brings us back again to the question of confidence and the removal

769
of fear and suspicion. In fact, we come back to the Monckton Report again: what is now being done to remove discrimination and suspicion sufficiently to dispel those fears and to cause political divisions to be on non-racial lines?
I think he, and I should say all my noble friends and no doubt everybody in this House, greatly regrets the decision of the National Democratic Party, Mr. Nkomo's Party, not to take part in the election. We think it is a great pity and that they are making a mistake. They should work the Constitution as best they can, and hope, as the Government say, to win in due course some of the "A" roll seats. I think it has very rarely been to the advantage of a minority Party to boycott the Constitution offered them, even if it is nothing like what they hoped for; and we feel that the Constitution in those two vital respects is not what is wanted for the future of Rhodesia.
I should like to end by saying to the Rhodesian Europeans that I beg them not to rest content with this Constitution, and not to feel that they have given all that can possibly be expected of them and that they can now stand still for a number of years. Rate of change is so rapid, and Africans are so aware of what is happening in the rest of the world, that, in their own interests, Rhodesians dare not stand still. They must go on and take what steps they can to remove this suspicion and then perhaps, as the Government say, all races living in Rhodesia can work together as Rhodesians.
5.15 p.m.
EARL WINTERTON: My Lords, I am conscious of the fact that I have addressed your Lordships' House rather more often lately than I should have done, and also spoken too long. I hope to speak for only a very short time this afternoon. The noble Earl who has just sat down commenced his speech by saying that the Declaration of Rights was not as efficient a safeguard as that in the existing Constitution. Well, it obviously would have been impossible for the noble Duke in charge of the Bill to state the naked facts about the present Constitution, and there are obvious reasons why the Opposition do not want to do so. I, as one who first went to Rhodesia as a visitor in 1912, and was
770
then owner of land in Northern Rhodesia, would venture with respect to tell your Lordships' House facts about the present Constitution.
There are alleged safeguards in it, but anyone who knows anything about white communities overseas knows that no British Government can really enforce those safeguards, because, as Lord Malvern, in a speech which caused resentment on the other side of the House but which I, personally, thought a very good speech, pointed out, there is no way of enforcing those safeguards except by using British troops, which would bring down any Government. You cannot go back to the days of Lord North; you cannot say to a European community overseas, "We are going to tell you what to do." It is impossible, and everybody knows that in private, though few people have the courage that Lord Malvern had to state it in public. I think it is greatly to the credit of the Southern Rhodesia Government over many years that they very carefully avoided any conflict with Her Majesty's Government because they knew how calamitous it would be. Therefore, I contend that the Declaration of Rights, with its appeal to the Privy Council, is a more effective safeguard than that in the present Constitution.
I do not object—he is perfectly entitled to put his point of view—to the points which Lord Lucan put. I hope he will not think I am making a wounding observation if I say that to some Europeans in Southern Rhodesia his remarks were slightly patronising when he was telling them what they had to do in the future. That is for them to decide, and one of the great advantages of this new Constitution is, I am glad to say, that neither another place nor this House will have an opportunity of criticising, as far as I know, what the Southern Rhodesia Government does, any more than they would have the right to say what the Australian Government or the Canadian Government should do, except on a Motion to Resolve.
There has been far too much criticism and patronising attitude towards Europeans in Southern Rhodesia on the part of certain people in this country. I do not suggest for a moment that that is true of most of the noble Lords opposite or their supporters in another place,

771
but it is true of many organs of the Press, and I can tell your Lordships it is deeply resented. I am on very friendly terms with some very important people in Rhodesia, but it would be a gross breach of confidence were I to read some of the things they write to me about the attitude towards them of certain newspapers and others in this country who seem to look upon them as sort of "Legrees". I want to say, with great respect to your Lordships, that I very much hope that it will go out from this House as a whole that we have the utmost friendliness towards Europeans in Southern Rhodesia, which does not prevent us from having the same friendliness towards Africans. As the noble Duke pointed out in his speech, there are a very large number of Africans in Southern Rhodesia who are perfectly prepared to work this Constitution and who are perfectly happy to see that it is carried into effect.
I must pay the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, one compliment. I was very glad he said that there had been an advance in what one might call the social and economic position of Africans in Southern Rhodesia. I should have liked him to add, and I would add, that those who seek to draw a comparison between the situation in Southern Rhodesia and that in South Africa are doing, grave injustice to Southern Rhodesia; there is no sort of comparison between the attitudes of the two countries towards the African. The colour bar has been lowered.
Here I must say another thing which I think should be stated. It should be remembered that Sir Edgar Whitehead and Sir Roy Welensky are in a difficult position. I should imagine that privately they would like to see the pace of advance in economic and social matters of the Africans greater than it is, but they have to have regard to the fact of the European electorate, on whom, of course, they depend very largely for their position in office, and if they attempted to go too fast they would only make the situation worse. Personally I must say this. I regard the statement of Mr. Macleod that it was better to go too fast than too slow as absolutely calamitous. It has brought Kenya to the verge of bankruptcy and
772
chaos, and I am very glad that the Southern Rhodesians take what I regard as a more statesmanlike view and believe you should bring on the Africans gradually.
I have only two other things to say. I was deeply shocked at the time of the referendum—which, incidentally, was a surprise in regard to the size of the vote in favour of the new Constitution—at the ill-concealed glee of certain British newspapers and certain elements of Leftist opinion in this country at what they hoped was going to be a sort of revolt on the part of the Africans. As your Lordships are aware, there was an attempt at a general strike, which was a complete failure; there were attempts to cause disturbances at various times, which were put down on the whole with a minimum of force. I am glad to think that the result was not to exacerbate feeling between Europeans and the Africans, the great bulk of whom do not like the extremists in Southern Rhodesia and, for that matter, the African extremists elsewhere.
The last thing I would say is this. I think a tribute should be paid to the statesmanship of Her Majesty's Government in Great Britain, especially the Commonwealth Secretary, and also to Sir Edgar Whitehead and his Government and, of course, to Sir Roy Welensky and the Federal Government, though they are not immediately concerned, for having brought about this new Constitution. I agree to this extent with the noble Earl, Lord Lucan: that despite the difficulties to which I have just referred in advancing as rapidly as he would like, and indeed as I should like, I hope there will be an advance, and I hope that the Southern Rhodesian Europeans will realise the need for that advance. Apart from that, I believe this to be an excellent Bill and I hope it will open a happy new chapter in Southern Rhodesia.
5.25 p.m.
LORD MILVERTON: My Lords, I rise to make a very brief contribution to this debate. It is not the time or the place, I suggest, to go into the details of the new Constitution which will replace the present one, which is now 40 years old and admittedly has grown somewhat out of date. I have no doubt that the noble Duke who is to reply will reply adequately to the noble Earl, Lord

773
Lucan, in some of his comments, but I should like to make this comment on what he said. Although he was manifestly trying to be fair, and he admitted that a good deal of progress had been made in Southern Rhodesia, the whole of what he said seemed to be shot through with the—I almost said customary suspicion, but what we have grown to regard in certain circles as customary suspicion, of the European electorate and the European Government in Southern Rhodesia. It has been said over and over again, and those who know Southern Rhodesia have implored people in this country to remember, that these are men and women who have made their home there; it is their country and their home; and it is most unlikely that they would deliberately spoil the future of their children and their children's children by grossly unfair or unwise acts.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. I do not think I expressed any suspicion of Europeans. I mentioned acts that I thought were likely to cause suspicion, and I mentioned the large number of exceptions attached to the Declaration of Rights. But I did not intend to imply suspicion; I said that the suspicion was there.
LORD MILVERTON: My Lords, I am sorry if I misunderstood the noble Earl, but I made a note at the time and I thought he said that, although certain statements of policy had been made, one wondered whether they would be adequately carried out; which does imply a certain amount of suspicion. But however that may be, I feel that this is a very historic occasion. To any fair observer, the amount of progress in thought and vision which has taken place in Southern Rhodesia in the last few years is quite astounding, and I feel that it is due to Sir Edgar Whitehead and to the present electorate in Southern Rhodesia, as well as to the Secretary of State here, to express our public appreciation of the great forward step which the people of Southern Rhodesia, all races resident there, are now taking.
This Constitution provides far-reaching advances for the Africans, with the full consent, let us remember, of the Euro-
774
peans. That in itself is surely an historic event, the evidence of a desire to implement the principle of partnership and to give to the African community a platform and an open road to full participation in the government of Southern Rhodesia. As has been pointed out, there is nothing at all to prevent the African from qualifying within a period of what some people have said is fifteen years and having a majority in the Government of Southern Rhodesia. It rests purely with the African to qualify himself. In effect this constitutional change will give to Southern Rhodesia much the same degree of independence as was enjoyed by Australia and New Zealand before the passing of the Statute of Westminster in 1931.
I do not think it is necessary for me to go into the question of the safeguards. We have been assured by many highly competent judges that those safeguards are infinitely more efficacious than those which existed before. The Declaration of Rights, the Constitutional Council and the power of the courts surely must give every possible protection, if one looks at it reasonably, and if one tries to remember throughout that the people resident, the Europeans who are now Africans, Southern Rhodesian Africans, are reasonable people. Most of the criticism seems to me to be based on the assumption that they will behave unreasonably. I suggest that that is unfair as well as being untrue.
I think the answer to the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, is contained in some of the words which were uttered by Sir Edgar Whitehead at the end of July last, when he said:
"The stage is set for the African people to play their part fully in the political life of the country, and to have a hand in the framing of policy and all matters that affect them. The removal of the United Kingdom control under a new Constitution will call for a great sense of responsibility among the African members of the electorate, who will also require a wise and tolerant use of their new powers to ensure that the great advance in race relations which the referendum result shows is consolidated and developed as the pattern for the Rhodesia of the future."
He finished by saying:
"I would say to all Rhodesians, and particularly the Africans, that the safeguard, in the Declaration of Rights will be far more effective to protect the interests of all races than the old powers of a Secretary of State ever were."

775
Under the new Constitution it will be impossible for any Government to remain in power for very long in Southern Rhodesia unless they get substantial support from the voters of all the other races resident there. Surely that in itself is something to consider. I therefore welcome this Bill and congratulate the Secretary of State and Sir Edgar Whitehead, who is, I suggest, a worthy exponent of the principles laid down originally by Cecil Rhodes.
5.34 p.m.
LORD COLYTON: My Lords, I, too, rise this afternoon to welcome and to support this Bill. The main line of attack by the Opposition in another place, when, most regrettably I thought, they divided the House on Second Reading, was on rather legalistic and, I believe, quite unreal issues. The main Opposition argument, which indeed was deployed again this afternoon by the noble Earl, was that the existing reserve powers of Her Majesty's Government, which have in fact never been used, are more valuable than the safeguards which have been quoted here this afternoon—of a Constitutional Council, a Declaration of Rights, resort to the courts, an appeal to the Privy Council, and so on. I have no doubt whatever that, from the point of view of all sections of the population—Europeans and Asians, as well, of course, as the Africans—the new safeguards are infinitely preferable. But I do not intend to pursue that aspect of the matter this afternoon. It has already been dealt with most efficiently by some of my noble friends, and no doubt will be touched on by my noble friend the Minister when he comes to reply.
The point which I should like to emphasise this afternoon is that the Bill which we are discussing exemplifies the most remarkable change in European public opinion in Southern Rhodesia—something which, three years ago or even a year ago, was quite inconceivable. It is almost exactly twelve months ago that I had the honour to attend as an observer the so-called Indaba or the National Convention in Salisbury, which was an unofficial gathering of nearly 200 people drawn from almost every European, African and Asian organisation. They spent a whole week there
776
threshing out the vital problems which lay ahead, and they produced a most important report. I have no doubt whatever that it was that report, and the principles laid down in it, which was adopted both by the Southern Rhodesian Government and the United Kingdom Government as a basis for their discussions at the constitutional talks held in Salisbury last February.
That Constitution was fully accepted at the time by Mr. Nkomo of the National Democratic Party; but unfortunately—I say this with great reluctance—Mr. Nkomo and his colleagues were induced by external influences, first of all, I would regret to say, in this country, and then of course, later on, elsewhere, to repudiate the agreement. I hope that when the elections come along Mr. Nkomo and his colleagues will change their minds and that they will have the statesmanship to abandon any decision to boycott the election. Clearly, it must be both in the interests of Southern Rhodesia and of their own Party that they should take part. But if they do not do so, though it would be regrettable, I do not think it would be the end of the world. There are many other highly qualified and intelligent Africans all eager and able to play their part in the political life of Southern Rhodesia.
Many of these are members of the United Federal Party. I should like to emphasise that they are not stooges. That is the propaganda which is put out so widely in this country and, unfortunately, given currency by the Press. They are not stooges, but are men who have great intelligence and wills of their own. Then, indeed, there are many other moderate Africans who at present belong to no political Party and who realise that the future prosperity of their country lies in the development of a non-racial society. All these Africans have every reason to be encouraged by the events of the past twelve months.
As I say, there has been a most remarkable change in the climate of Southern Rhodesian opinion. Not only has there been a change, but practical effect has been given to it: the civil service has been thrown open to the African; as I understand it, and, in spite of what the noble Earl said,

777
the pass laws have been virtually abolished; Africans have been admitted into the trade unions; all teachers' salaries have been equalised. Laws against discrimination in public places, as I understand it, have been passed and are being put into effect. The Land Apportionment Act has been amended, the most important feature being to allow Africans to hold land in the European townships; and, as regards the rural areas, it should be noted that the President of the Southern Rhodesian African Farmers' Union quite recently said that the total repeal of the Land Apportionment Act at this stage, unless accompanied by new protective measures, would be even more disastrous to Africans than its continued implementation.
Having regard to what the noble Earl said about the Armed Forces—I cannot tell him whether he is right about the Territorial forces—certainly the African police reserve, for which there have been large numbers of recruits among Africans, was entirely responsible only a few weeks ago for dealing with the troubles in the Harare township outside Salisbury. It was Africans, and not Europeans, who dealt with those particular disturbances.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, is the noble Lord sure about that? I thought I read that there were white Territorial troops deployed at the time?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: My Lords, if I may intervene, I should think that discussion on this point is perhaps slightly off the point. I think the matter of the Armed Services is one for the Federal Government rather than the Southern Rhodesian Government itself. It is outside the powers of the Southern Rhodesian Government.
LORD COLYTON: I entirely accept that. I was merely saying that the police reserves were concerned and that they were entirely African. They are getting large numbers of recruits, and they have handled these matters extremely efficiently.
It is perfectly true that the Africans cannot hope at the moment to win more than seventeen or eighteen seats out of 65; but surely this political advance—the first admission of Africans into the
778
Southern Rhodesian Parliament, and one which has been approved by the great mass of the Europeans—is a remarkable achievement, having regard to the trend of events elsewhere in Africa, particularly further South. It must not be forgotten that this Constitution, with the grant of about 25 per cent. of the seats to the Africans, was approved by a three to one referendum held in Salisbury last June. I am perfectly convinced in my own mind that the inclusion of Africans in Parliament and the changes to the franchise were genuinely welcomed on their own merits by the majority of Europeans. At the same time, I also feel sure that many of them voted as they did because they believed that this advance in Southern Rhodesia would contribute greatly to solving some of the problems facing the future of the Federation as a whole.
I have believed all along, and I think my noble friend Lord Molson would agree, that Southern Rhodesia has really been the clue to the problem of federation. Now with this change in the Constitution of Southern Rhodesia, a great deal of what was written in the Monckton Report is out of date. Further, my Lords, in voting as they did, the Europeans in Southern Rhodesia were also no doubt influenced by the announcement of Her Majesty's Government that month—I think it was a few weeks earlier on June 13-of a final decision in regard to the next constitutional steps in Northern Rhodesia. If, as has been suggested, there is now to be any going back on the decisions reached last June over Northern Rhodesia, except over the smallest points of detail, it would, in my opinion, not merely be regrettable as far as Northern Rhodesia is concerned, but it would involve a breach of faith with the European voters of Southern Rhodesia; and that, my Lords, is important.
The elections under the new Constitution in Southern Rhodesia will be held early next year. The Southern Rhodesian Government, under the enlightened leadership of Sir Edgar Whitehead, are bound to have a tough fight against the Southern Rhodesian Dominion Party, and there I should like to distinguish the Southern Rhodesian Dominion Party from the Federal Dominion Party and its leaders. If it can be said during

779
that election, for one reason or another, that the voters have been let down by the United Federal Party or Her Majesty's Government, there is a risk of a majority being returned for a Party which is utterly opposed to the admission of Africans into the Southern Rhodesian Parliament and which, in general, advocates a policy not far removed from that of Doctor Verwoert. I hope that the Government, in dealing with this question of the Northern Rhodesian Constitution, will have this point very much in mind.
To conclude, my Lords, I believe that this Constitution offers a real opportunity of creating a non-racial State in Southern Rhodesia. If it succeeds, it can greatly assist the development of the whole Federation on a similiar basis. I have always believed, since the very early days, that federation would be not merely of great benefit to the people of our three central African territories, but it would be of immense value as an example of what could be done elsewhere. My Lords, I still believe this: and I also believe that the Constitution which we are discussing this afternoon forms one of the most important steps towards that goal.
5.44 p.m.
LORD MOLSON: My Lords, I rise to support this Bill, but from an angle which is somewhat divergent from that of my noble friends on this side of the House who have already spoken. This Bill is paradoxical. It is hoped and intended by everyone promoting it and supporting it that it will lead to a more liberal constitution and one which will give greater scope to Africans in Southern Rhodesia. The paradox is that, in order to increase the safeguards of the Africans, it is proposed by this new Constitution to sweep away those safeguards which were provided in the Constitution of 1923.
I think it best to be quite blunt about these things. In the last twenty or thirty years there has been a complete change in the outlook of Governments of both Parties and of Parliament in this country to the problems of Africa. I have no hesitation in saying that neither Party to-day would make itself responsible for a Constitution like that of 1923, which gave to a small minority of white people
780
political power over a very large majority of Africans. It is better, therefore, to realise, and to admit quite frankly, that there has been this change in outlook. As my noble friend Lord Winterton has said, it has proved difficult or impossible for the Government in this country to apply the safeguards against discrimination which were provided in the Constitution of 1923. I am not seeking to make a Party point, but it is significant that the Land Apportionment Act, for example, was approved by a Labour Government when it was in power, and the Secretary of State for the Colonies of that time never sought to intervene.
I welcome the proposals for these new—if I may use a modern slang expression—built-in safeguards. The idea of a Constitutional Council is identical with what the Monckton Commission recommended, but we called it a Council of State, as it is called in Kenya. I also welcome the provision of a Declaration of Rights, the purpose of which is to ensure that the same rights shall accrue to all people, regardless of their race or colour.
Now, my Lords, my noble friend Lord Colyton, said that the Monckton Commission had found that Southern Rhodesia was the clue to federation. Well, I suppose that "clou" is the English or French word for a nail. Actually, our finding was that the intense unpopularity of Southern Rhodesia and its discriminatory legislation was the chief cause of the opposition to federation in the two Northern Territories. Although the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, quoted it, I do not hesitate to repeat what we said in paragraph 221:
"…no new form of association is likely to succeed unless Southern Rhodesia is willing to make drastic changes in its racial policies."
If I may reminisce for one moment, I very well remember the Vice-Chairman of our Commission putting a point in Northern Rhodesia to a number of African witnesses who appeared before us simultaneously. They had raised a very large number of objections to federation, many of them trifling or even irrelevant and based upon a misunderstanding of the Constitution. So he put to them this question:
"If we were able to do away with all of these grievances that you have recited, would you then be in favour of federation?"

781
As soon as the question was translated, they all rose spontaneously and simultaneously, and said:
"No, on no account, not as long as it means being associated with Southern Rhodesia."
That is the reason why I am venturing to refer to painful matters in this connection which my noble friend Lord Winterton deprecated being discussed.
For those of us who are sincerely desirous that federation should go on and should be a success, it is of the utmost importance that there should be changes in the attitude of Southern Rhodesia. I fully recognise that that has been happening in the last few years. I think it was in large measure due to the prominence which we gave to this matter of discrimination in our Report. I think it was my noble friend Lord Colyton who said that it was most unfair to compare Southern Rhodesia with the Union of South Africa. That is perfectly true. We pointed out that the movements are in exactly opposite directions. Southern Rhodesia is, and has for many years been, moving in a liberal direction, but it has not been going fast enough, and I hope that the effect of this Bill will be to speed it up.
I am glad that tribute has been paid to Sir Edgar Whitehead. It is often the case that elected Members of Parliament are more enlightened than their constituents—one of the things, my Lords, that it is safer to say in your Lordships' House than it would be in another place. I am bound to say that, when I met Ministers of the Southern Rhodesian Government, I was well aware of their anxiety to move forward as fast as they dare. My Lords, we cannot blame Sir Edgar Whitehead for having moved slowly and prudently. At the last election his Party was in a minority when the first votes were cast. It was only the effect of the transferable vote that brought his Party ahead of the Dominion Party and into power, and even then with a majority of only three. I am very glad indeed that all the indications, like the Indaba to which my noble friend Lord Colyton referred and now the referendum, which has meant that an overwhelmingly white electorate has given its approval to these forward steps, indicate a further movement in the right direction.
782
I will not say that the threat from the Dominion Party has disappeared, but it obviously has been largely reduced as a result of the satisfactory result of the referendum.
EARL WINTERTON: My Lords, as my noble friend referred to me, I should like to ask him a question. It may be my stupidity, but I really do not quite understand what his grievance is against the Southern Rhodesian Government. He has admitted that there has been a great advance in the last few years—whatever the cause is, I do not know; it may be the result of the Monckton Report, but, personally, I do not think that Southern Rhodesians attach quite as much importance to that Report as do the members of the Commission—but he then went on to say that it would be very difficult for Sir Edgar Whitehead to move too fast. What is the noble Lord's grievance, if he has one?
LORD MOLSON: I am not conscious that I have a grievance. I merely say that although there is a movement in the right direction, it has not gone far enough or fast enough. If my noble friend wants a further answer, it is that so far the Land Apportionment Act has been dealt with in only a very halfhearted manner. I hope and believe that there will be fundamental changes in it as a result of the Report of the Select Committee upon the subject. If he wants another example, I would say that so far the Plewman Report on the condition of Africans in urban areas has not yet been tackled, and in a number of other respects I would say that there still is very great need for further steps to be taken and I do not doubt that they will be.
EARL WINTERTON: Hear, hear !
LORD MOLSON: I hope, therefore, that my noble friend is in agreement with me upon this subject.
My Lords, there are three ways in which progress can be made. One is what might be called the removal of pinpricks, and a great deal has already been done in that way. There is also what I am quite sure Africans consider to be the most important of all, and that is an increase in their political power. The effect of the new franchise and the new Constitution, as the noble Duke pointed

783
out in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, will be that no candidate will be able to ignore the attitude of Africans. But I would also emphasise the great importance of an improvement in the economic position of the Africans, and I hope that Sir Roy Welensky will lend the weight of his great authority to a movement in that direction.
While in this country, he has expressed his regret at the speed with which the Government's policy is being applied in the Colonies. In the Albert Hall he asked for a change in that policy. He obviously is not very likely to get that. The new Secretary of State has just repeated that the policy of Mr. Macleod was not only that of an individual but of the Government and that he intends to continue with the same policy. I hope that in Southern Rhodesia Sir Roy Welensky will urge the desirability of moving more rapidly, especially in that economic sphere in which Sir Roy Welensky himself has, as one would expect in the case of an ex-trade union leader, taken a very great interest. It was only a few years ago, and since the war, that, as a result of the pressure of the white railway trade union of which Sir Roy Welensky had been the organiser, Europeans who were not even British subjects were imported into the Federation to act as firemen on the locomotives. This clear and harsh application of race prejudice and a colour bar has had a permanent and a most unfortunate effect. They are moving in the right direction; already the colour bar has nominally been done away with on the Rhodesian Railways. By going further in that direction a great deal will be done to commend this Constitution to the people of Southern Rhodesia and it will enable partnership in the true sense of the word to be applied in industry as well as in politics.
Since my noble friend Lord Colyton referred to the Northern Rhodesian Constitution, which I should not have thought was within the ambit of this Bill, I should like to say that I entirely disagree with him. I very much hope that the new Secretary of State will carry out in the spirit and in the letter the undertaking of Mr. Macleod that the representations of the African Parties and the Liberal Party in Northern Rhodesia will be given full weight. It was made quite plain by
784
Mr. Macleod that he had not intended in the second White Paper to alter the general effect of the first White Paper. If, as I believe has proved to be the case, an unintentional alteration in the balance of power has taken place, then I think it most important that the British Government should be willing to rectify what was an unintentional change.
EARL WINTERTON: My Lords, I am sorry to interrupt my noble friend again—I think we are both out of order—but he will be aware that Sir Roy Welensky regards the pledge which was given to him as equally binding as that to which my noble friend refers. This is very delicate ground to discuss in your Lordships' House.
LORD MOLSON: This is all extremely delicate, but, of course, any attempt by the Federal Government to prevent advance being made in the Northern territories is completely unconstitutional. It has been made perfectly clear, time and again, both in the Constitution and by Ministers of the British Government, that the responsibility for the rate of advance in the Northern territories rests exclusively with Her Majesty's Government in this country. Although they are prepared to consider representations from the Federal Government, in the words of my noble friend Lord Chandos the political advancement of Africans in the Northern territories must be, and be seen to be, safeguarded. And as my noble friend Lord Swinton, when he was asked whether amendment to the Territorial Constitutions required the assent of the Federal Government, said on July 7, 1953 [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 183, col. 338]: "The answer to that is emphatically No".
My Lords, I support this Bill for three reasons. First, I believe that it will have the effect of facilitating the preservation of federation. Secondly, I believe it will give immediate advance in Southern Rhodesia. Thirdly, I believe it will strengthen the hands of the enlightened forces. I believe that it will, in general, promote the happiness and the welfare of the Federation, and of Southern Rhodesia in 'particular. I hope—I will not say that I have complete faith—that it will result in a liberal advance, in an improvement in the social status, in the economic standards and in the

785
political rights of the Africans, and that it will result in a genuine partnership between the two races.
6.2 p.m.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: My Lords, first of all, I should like to thank all your Lordships who have taken part in what I am sure has been a most valuable debate. If I might, I will deal at greater length with the points raised by the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, than those points raised by my noble friends on this side of the House, because they, without exception, were speaking in support of this Bill. The noble Earl, Lord Lucan, had two major criticisms of the Bill. He felt that the safeguards were inadequate, and he was distressed about the lack of African representation.
If I might, I will take the question of safeguards first. I think the points he made were two-fold. One was that there were too many loopholes; secondly, that the Declaration of Rights was not retrospective. As regards the loopholes, no doubt the noble Earl was referring to what I might call the "escape clauses". I would just say to him that I think anyone who studies any Declaration of Rights, whether it be the Charter of the United Nations or the Declaration of Rights in Sierra Leone or Nigeria, will find that those draftsmen who have drawn them up, with their immense knowledge and skill, have found it quite unavoidable, indeed inevitable, to put up these escape clauses, particularly in regard to conditions that might arise in an emergency. I do not think in this case the Declaration of Rights goes any further at all in having loopholes than any similar document of the same kind.
As regards the question why the Declaration of Rights was not retrospective, I think we can say that this was because if it had been it would have thrown into doubt a number of laws, some of them designed to protect specifically African interests, some of which apply to native law and customs, and some of which are the basis of rural administration. Instead of this chaotic situation which would have occurred had the Declaration of Rights been retrospective, the Southern Rhodesian Government have put in hand an orderly review of the discriminatory laws on the Statute Book, and the first result of this review—the repeal of a number of laws
786
which were out of tune with modern times—has already taken place.
I mention the word "discrimination", and the noble Earl had something to say on that as well in his speech. I think it is fair to say—indeed, it is a matter of fact—that the United Federal Party, at their National Congress last month, at which nearly a third of the delegates were Africans, adopted unanimously a resolution that, at the next General Election, the Party should seek a mandate to debar racial discrimination at cinemas, hotels, and at other places. I believe they had other resolutions on the same ground, but I think there is every cause for happiness at the attitude which is being taken by the United Federal Party over this vexed question of discrimination.
The noble Earl also raised the point as to why the Constitutional Council was only advisory. I think I am right in saying, with respect to my noble friend, that in the Monckton Report there were suggestions to the effect that these Councils might have rather further powers than have actually been incorporated in the Bill. The reason for this is quite straightforward. This matter of the powers of the Constitutional Council was very fully discussed at the Southern Rhodesian Constitutional Conference, and it was the view of the delegates here—and I might add that it is not without significance that these views were especially strongly held by the members of the National Democratic Party—that the role of the Constitutional Council should be advisory only. The Conference considered that it was not right that a nonpolitical and non-professional body should have such a powerful brake upon the politically-elected Legislative Assembly, and the Conference felt that it would be important for the Constitutional Council to be kept non-political in such circumstances.
Secondly, the Conference considered that the courts of Southern Rhodesia, which I am sure your Lordships will all agree rightly enjoy a high reputation and respect for integrity, would be acceptable to all races as a safeguard of their rights, always provided that a satisfactory definiton of those rights could be laid down in a Declaration of Rights for the courts to interpret. To this safeguard, I might say that we added

787
a further bastion in the shape of an inalienable right of appeal in Declaration of Rights cases to the Privy Council, to which I alluded when I spoke earlier.
Then, on representation, I am afraid I can only repeat what I said earlier to the noble Earl. We hope and believe (I am glad to hear that my views have been endorsed by noble Lords on this side of the House) that the Africans at the first election under the new Constitution will have fifteen, anyway, and perhaps one or two more—say, seventeen—seats. But that is only a beginning. As time goes by there will be more Africans on the "A" roll and more Africans coming on to the "B" roll, so their influence in the electorate will be steadily growing. This is but a beginning, and I would ask the noble Earl to look at this representation only as a beginning, and one which we all hope, expect and believe will steadily grow. I hope I have dealt adequately with the points the noble Earl has raised.
To my noble friends, may I say how grateful I am for their support, and how delighted I am to learn that they support this Bill. We had characteristic and helpful contributions from my noble friends Lord Winterton and Lord Milverton. I should like to take this opportunity of referring to what my noble friend Lord Colyton had to say about the effect of a total abolition of the Land Apportionment Act. If that step were taken the lot of the African would be far worse than it is to-day. This, as my noble friend Lord Molson said, is a complicated and difficult matter which is under review. If the interests of the African in this all-important question of land are to be properly looked after, then we must take it gradually and slowly. Any action in haste would end in chaos and by far and away the first sufferer would be the African himself.
I was glad that the noble Lord, Lord Colyton drew attention to the Indaba, which he attended. I am happy that that was the case because it was a most important gathering, whose findings should have an important effect on the way in which Southern Rhodesia develops, and I am extremely grateful to him for having drawn attention to what happened at it. My noble friend Lord Molson spoke with all the authority and
788
knowledge of a member of the Monckton Commission, and I know that it will give my right honourable friend the Secretary of State satisfaction to know that he so warmly supports the Bill. The fact that we have his support behind us will give us great comfort. There was some discussion on matters concerning the Northern Territories. I hope that your Lordships will agree with me that it would not be seemly in a debate on this Bill for me to add anything to those discussions. It was outside the debate and therefore I would just leave it on one side.
Before I close, may I come back for a moment to the speech of the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, and say how very pleased I was that he expressed regret that the N.D.P. were going to boycott the voters' roll and the election. The noble Earl expressed the hope that they would change their minds. I know that views such as that, coming from the opposite side of your Lordships' House, will carry great weight in the councils of the N.D.P.; and, if I may say so, it was a most helpful contribution to this debate, one which I hope will be noticed by Africans and members of the N.D.P. in due course. I thank your Lordships for the helpful way we have proceeded in this debate.
On Question, Bill read 2a; Committee negatived.

THE LOSS OF THE "CLAN KEITH"
6.13 p.m.
THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERY THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERY rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether there is sufficient information upon the sinking of the British ship "Clan Keith" on November 6 off Tunis to decide whether the explosion was inboard or outboard; and, further, if the explosion was inboard, whether it could have any connection with the series of explosions going on in the world at the present time. The noble and gallant Earl said: My Lords, I rise to ask the Unstarred Question in my name on the Order Paper. When the Question appeared, it seemed that a certain section of people thought that I was going to divulge some secret knowledge about the unfortunate loss of the "Clan Keith". I, of course, have no such knowledge. I am not in the position to

789
get it. But I want it to be recorded—and this is the object of my standing here and saying this—that that explosion ought not to be treated as just an ordinary sea event, unfortunate, sad, but not out of the way. That ship was a fine British ship belonging to the Clan Line, which is a very good line, well officered, well-commanded and all well found. That 7,000-odd ton ship has gone to the bottom. Whether the explosion was internal or external remains to be seen.
If the explosion was internal, it would be a serious thing and would need to be followed up; but if it was external, as the papers say and as it is understood the captain has said, of course, it may be comfortable to write it off and say it was an ordinary catastrophe—another ship gone. But if it was an internal explosion, I believe that if the trail of the bomb were followed up, it would lead to something very serious and give us a warning.
What would be the motive of enemy agents in this country in getting rid of one of our ships? I suggest a motive at once. The motive is that it is many years since the first consignment of enemy explosives was landed in this country and they cannot just be put there—they need a test. What better test could they have, what more realistic test, than to put a bomb into a British ship and blow her up? That would be a good test and I consider that it is a feasible one, too. As I say, the Clan Line is A.1 in everything, but in a crowded port it is not difficult to pass a box. I know that I shall be interrupted and told that I am, wandering, but I am trying to make a case why this examination should be a very thorough one. If the bomb was internal and if the trail is properly followed up, it may lead to valuable discoveries; but if the explosion were external, it would be well to brush it off, give it a routine inquiry and then no further notice.
It is a difficult point to put, but the captain is said to have already given his view that the explosion was an external one. With all due respect to him. I think that he would be predisposed to give that opinion. It was very heavy weather. The ship was blown up and sinking, and I do not think he was considering whether it was in or outside his ship. He
790
was thinking about his passengers and crew and how to get them out of it. He had no time to go into these details. I would suggest that not too much weight should be put upon that evidence.
What would be the trail it would lead to? It might lead up to where certain people kept bombs, where the ingredients were. They are all there, and it might well be that they wanted to fire those bombs as the first test; and as war approached would start shipping bombs into the various ships, and we should be handicapped to the extent that the ships were blown up in that way.
I am putting it very badly, but I feel that in this case, and under the conditions in which we now live, this matter should be closely gone into and should not be brushed aside as an unfortunate incident. I raise my voice to-day only to get an assurance that the Government are looking into this.
6.22 p.m.
LORD CHESHAM: My Lords, I am sorry to say to the noble Earl that there is not at present sufficient information available for me to give as full and proper an answer to the Question that he has posed to us as he would probably have liked. He will appreciate, as will your Lordships, that, for reasons which I shall come to in a minute. I cannot follow him along the lines of thought which he has put to us. I think the thing is for me to do the best I can with what can now be said.
As the noble Earl told us, the "Clan Keith" sank off North-Western Tunisia and it was reported that she broke in two following an explosion. The weather in the area at the time, I gather, was very severe. The ship carried a total crew of 68, of whom 54 were residents of Pakistan, 3 of South Africa and 11 of the United Kingdom. First news of the casualty was received from the motor vessel "Durham Trader" which, during the morning, encountered one of the lifeboats of the "Clan Keith" carrying 5 survivors, including the master. Two further survivors were later picked up from the water by the Finnish tanker "Nunnalahti", but one of those survivors unfortunately died. Her Majesty's Cruiser "Blake", with the frigates "Plymouth" and "Rhyl", the destroyer "Diana" and the French

791
minesweeper "Narvik", went to the scene and, together with aircraft and other merchant vessels, searched the area for further survivors, but, I am sorry to say, without success. They did see wreckage and a number of empty lifeboats. Therefore, my Lords, it must be concluded, unfortunately, that 62 members of the crew have lost their lives in this very sad occurrence and I am sure the House would wish to join with me in expressing our deep sympathy with the bereaved relatives.
My right honourable friend the Minister of Transport has insufficient information in his possession at this moment to arrive at any view of the probable cause of the loss of the "Clan Keith". He has ordered a preliminary inquiry into the casualty under Section 465 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. The master and other survivors, who have been flown back to the United Kingdom by the owners of the ship, are co-operating with the officers of the Ministry who are conducting the inquiry. When sufficient information has been obtained to enable my right honourable friend to arrive at a considered view on the nature of the casualty he will decide whether to order a public formal investigation.
I am sure that neither the noble Earl nor the House will expect me to anticipate a decision which my right honourable friend, I am sure your Lordships will agree, rightly prefers to take in the light of the fullest information obtainable. I think I may say, however, that it would be unusual if a formal investigation were not ordered into a casualty in which such heavy loss of life has taken place. But, meanwhile, it would be clearly wrong to prejudge in any way the results of the preliminary inquiry or of any formal investigation that may be ordered. I can, however, assure the noble Earl that this matter will not be, as
792
he put it, brushed aside. He will appreciate that I cannot follow him and cannot discuss what he suggested to us on the subject of bombs and so on. But as I say, due attention will be paid to what he has said to-day and this investigation will be treated, as I hope all such investigations are treated, with the utmost seriousness and pursued, as I think it must be in this case, to the ultimate to which it is possible to pursue it. I hope the noble Earl will feel from what I have said that the matter will be properly and seriously treated.

EAST ANGLIAN WATER ORDER, 1961 [PETITION FOR AMENDMENT]
Message from the Commons to acquaint this House, That they have appointed Three Members to serve on the Joint Committee to consider the Petition for the Amendment of the Order, which stands referred to a Joint Committee:
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the following Lords be proposed to the House to form the Committee to join with the Committee of the House of Commons for the Consideration of the said Order, and the Petition for its amendment; (viz.,)

V. Goschen,

L. Colwyn,

L. Stonham;

agreed to; and the said Lords appointed accordingly: Ordered, That such Committee have power to agree with the Committee of the House of Commons in the appointment of a Chairman; then a Message was ordered to be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint them therewith and to propose that the Joint Committee do meet in Committee Room No. 4 on Tuesday, the 28th instant, at Half-past Eleven o'clock:
House adjourned at twenty-eight minutes past six o'clock.