HL Deb 19 March 1962 vol 238 cc392-9

2.43 p.m.

Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF PERTH)

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time. It may be convenient to the House if any discussion is reserved until the Amendments are moved.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a. — (The Earl of Perth.)

On Question, Bill read 3a.

Clause 2 [Power of Her Majesty to provide for performance of functions heretofore performed by Federal authorities for benefit of federated colonies]:

THE EARL OF PERTH moved, in Clause 2, at the beginning, to insert: With a view to securing that, notwithstanding the exclusion of colonies from, or the dissolution of, the Federation, the performance of functions performed by the Federal authorities for the benefit of the colonies which at the passing of this Act are included in the Federation is maintained pending the making apart from this section of arrangements in that behalf of a permanent nature,".

The noble Earl said. My Lords, perhaps I may deal with the second Amendment, as it is consequential, at the same time as I deal with the first. It will be recalled that during the Committee stage there was considerable anxiety that, so far as possible, it should be made clear that the authority for which this particular clause provides to carry on the common services will be set up for a relatively short time—temporary rather than permanent. I recall in particular (because I expressed my difficulties in regard to this point) what the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, said. His words—and I will read them out—were [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 238 (No. 50), col. 354]: If only something could be incorporated to give a clue to the fact that this is merely intended to operate pending the discussions, I myself should be perfectly happy.

My Lords, that is just what we have tried to do by this Amendment. We have tried to give a clue to the fact that these arrangements for an authority to carry on the common services are going to be temporary, and not permanent. I cannot go further than this, for reasons that I am sure your Lordships will understand. If one wants to be more precise, one must be able to put down something which marks a clear end to the period for which it will operate, and, for various reasons, this is difficult. But within that difficulty, the statement of intent in the Amendment is how I have tried to do what is wanted, and I hope that this will meet the wishes of those of your Lordships who originally raised this matter during the Committee stage. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 19, at beginning insert the said words.—(The Earl of Perth.)

LORD SILKIN

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Earl for having done his best to carry out what he said he would try to do and what I think at one point he said he could not do. He will remember the circumstances in which this discussion arose. An Amendment was moved by which we were desirous to ensure that this Council which was to be set up should contain representatives from each of the islands. The noble Earl's reply to that, virtually, was, "This is something that we might well have considered if this were to he a permanent Council, but it is a tem- porary one, and in those circumstances it seems hardly worth while and reasonable that the Council should consist of representatives from each of the islands". That seemed to me a satisfactory answer subject to two points: First, that there was nothing in the Bill at all to indicate that it was to be a temporary Council; and, secondly, that there was no definition of what a "temporary" Council meant.

I think the noble Earl has done his best in both respects. He has made it quite clear that this is intended to be temporary, and that it is to be understood that it is until a permanent solution has been arrived at. In those circumstances, in accordance with my own statement that I should be satisfied if there were an indication that this was temporary, I am prepared to accept the Amendment, and I should like to thank the noble Earl for having done the impossible.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, I think this is a very reasonable Amendment indeed, and I am glad that the noble Earl has seen fit to put it down. It makes clear beyond all peradventure what was not clear before. There is one small matter which perhaps he could clear up, and that is as to the position of the Virgin Islands. As the noble Earl knows, they were not within the original Federation, but I take it that they will come within the scope of this Bill. They are mentioned in Clause 5, subsection (6), but there is no mention of them in this particular clause. Is there some motive for that, or is it intended that Clause 2 shall, by some other means, apply to these particular islands?

THE EARL OF LUCAN

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Earl for making my noble friend Lord Silkin, as he says, perfectly happy, having given him the point that he asked for; but I should like to make it clear that, so far as the main object of the Amendment which we moved in Committee goes, the noble Earl has not convinced us. I have looked again at what he said and the reasons he gave for its being impossible to make this authority a representative one, and I am bound to say that I remain unconvinced. But that matter we must leave. When the Bill goes to another place, it may still be taken up.

LORD WALSTON

My Lords, it would be churlish not to be grateful for the small comfort that the noble Earl has been able to give us, but I should like to put in a special word for the University of the West Indies. I think that to leave the future of the meteorological service and shipping somewhat in a vacuum for a few months, even for nine months, would perhaps not cause serious damage, but to leave the future of the University of the West Indies, which we hope will come to play a much larger part in the future, in a similar state can have great repercussions in the way people feel about it and the use to which it is put. There is a further point which makes this problem not only more urgent but also more difficult—that is, that the main bulk of the buildings and teaching is in Jamaica while a second large part of the University, including the former Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture, is in Trinidad. So already we have the difficult fact that the University is on two islands, both of which will now be out of the Federation. I hope that the noble Earl's Commissioner will give urgent attention to solving, with the least possible delay, the future of this great educational organisation, so that it will be known exactly how it is to be run, before any other less urgent services are considered.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, if I may, I will deal in order with the various points raised. The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, asked why the Virgin Islands were not included. This is because they are not at the present time a member of the group who are enjoying these common services, but I have no doubt, whether it is now or later, that if these Islands, or any other islands or even territories in the Caribbean or nearby, wish to join to take advantage of the common services, there will be no difficulty about their coming in in the proper way.

To turn to the point made by the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, he is right in recalling that the original purpose of his Amendment was to lay down in statutory form now the way in which the common services should be operated. I tried very hard to convince your Lordships that to do that now was not impossible but unwise—I think that is the word I should like to use—because we just do not know what is the best method of bringing them in. Although this may come up in another place, I do not believe that it is something that should be pressed, and the noble Lords' anxiety to arrive at a temporary arrangement is one we have taken care of.

I would say to the noble Lord, Lord Walston, that I fully agree with him about the importance of the University of the West Indies and I have no doubt that urgent attention will be given to the problem, to ensure that the work of the University goes on not only without hiatus but also without difficulty. I will see that whoever is given charge of the common services in the interim has this particular point brought to his attention. I hope that I have met the various points raised by your Lordships.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, I beg to move this Amendment, which is consequential on No. 1.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 22, leave out ("the colonies which at the passing of this Act are included in the Federation") and insert ("those colonies").—(The Earl of Perth.)

Clause 7 [Supplementary provisions as to Orders in Council]:

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, I beg to move the next Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 26, at beginning insert ("Subject to the following subsection").—(The Earl of Perth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, it will be recalled that during Committee stage an Amendment was moved to make the various clauses of this Bill subject to Affirmative Resolution by both Houses of Parliament. I explained to your Lordships why this was a difficult practice to follow in connection with much of what was contained in the Bill, but I recognised your Lordships' real anxiety that any new form of federation which might be decided upon should be subject to the opportunity of debate in both Houses and I undertook to introduce an appropriate Amendment to give effect to this. This is the purpose of the present Amendment, as I think your Lordships will see.

Amendment moved—

Page 6, line 31, at end insert: (" (4) The last foregoing subsection shall not apply to an instrument containing an Order in Council under section six of this Act making provision for the federation of, or the establishment of any other new form of government for, any colonies, but no recommendation shall be made to Her Majesty in Council to make an Order under the said section six making such provision unless a draft of the Order has been laid before Parliament and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.")—(The Earl of Perth.)

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Earl warmly for meeting the substance of an Amendment that we put down during Committee stage. I think that we ought to be particularly grateful to the noble Earl, because out of four Amendments, we seem to have half of them, and that is more than we can often claim. I think that the noble Earl's Amendment achieves the main object of our Amendment which, as the noble Earl pointed out, was rather wider in scope. It hoped to make sure that no major constitutional change would take place in the West Indies without the express approval of Parliament here.

As I understand it, the noble Earl's Amendment covers not only the regrouping of territories in a Federation but, in the words of the Amendment, "any other new form of government" for these colonies. For example, there may be a uniting of two colonies. One can conceive of a poorer colony wanting to tack on to a richer one. That has not been unknown in the past. Therefore, we could have both the uniting and the federating of larger groups. Perhaps the noble Earl will reassure me on that point. I hope the Amendment will also cover 'another form of government, which would be an important constitutional change—that is, the case of a Colony where the Constitution is suspended and the Colony is put under the direct rule of the Governor and of the Secretary of State. Your Lordships will remember that happened in British Guiana not very long ago and, unfortunately, it has happened in other parts of the world. I hope that this form of words will cover any major constitutional change of the three kinds to which I have referred and I should be much obliged if the noble Earl could perhaps reply to that query.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, by putting down this Amendment, the noble Earl, Lord Perth, has carried out in part the promise he made to us on Committee stage. The noble Earl said this [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 238 (No. 50). col. 362]: I will put in the Bill an Amendment which will ensure that in so far as Clause 6 is concerned the matter is subject to debate. On Clause 2 I cannot at this moment give any promise. I will certainly think about it. But as regards Clause 6 I will put it in the Bill at the next stage. This, the noble Earl has done. But so far as I can see, if he has given any thought to Clause 2, which is an important clause, he certainly did not refer to it to-day; and I imagine that the thought has been singularly unfruitful, because there is no Amendment clown about Clause 2.

That clause, as your Lordships will recall, provides for the setting up of the authority which will handle the performance of functions previously performed by the Federal authorities. These include a whole range of most important functions some of which your Lordships have heard about to-day. I think that an Order in Council which is to deal with all the important provisions should be debated in your Lordships' House. That seems to me to be more immediate than the Clause 6 powers, because this authority will be set up in the very near future, maybe in a month or two, or possibly a little longer. I am disappointed, as I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, will be (because he also pressed this point), that the noble Earl has neither put down an Amendment to this effect, nor even referred to it in his speech to-day.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, if I may deal with the second point first, I am afraid that there has been some misunderstanding. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, quoted what I said on the Committee stage, but what I meant was this: that I should be able to do what was asked in regard to Clause 6, but, so far as Clause 2 was concerned, I was thinking of the whole of the debate on the Committee stage, when it was asked that it should be made clear in Clause 2 that the authority would be only a temporary arrangement and not permanent. What I said was not meant to indicate (I am sorry if I gave the wrong impression) that this Amendment would provide that Clause 2 should be subject to Affirmative Resolution. I am sorry if I misled the noble Lord by what I said, but I think he will realise, in thinking this point over further, that much of Clause 2 is bound to be highly technical. We know the whole list of things to be covered. It is, if I may put it this way, purely administrative convenience that, while permanent arrangements are being worked out, there should be the authority to handle things. Therefore I do not think the issue of an Affirmative Resolution should arise when it comes to the permanent authority itself. As I said on the Committee stage, or perhaps earlier, this may not, in fact, take the form of an Order in Council, but could be an agreement between two, as it were, Sovereign Powers, namely, Jamaica, or possibly Trinidad, if they are independent at the time. I am sorry if I misled the noble Lord, and I can only offer this as my excuse.

On the point made by the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, Clause 6 and the Amendment would cover any association between Colonies but not the suspension of a Constitution. That is something which, when it does happen, as, unfortunately, it does from time to time, has, as your Lordships know, to happen very quickly. That is not intended to be covered—only the form of association. With those two explanations I hope that I may take it that the Amendments that I have proposed are acceptable to your Lordships.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PERTH

My Lords, I beg to move that the Privilege Amendments be agreed to.

Moved, That the Privilege Amendments be agreed to. —(The Earl of Perth.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.