§ LORD BROCKWAYMy 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 they will indicate to the Government of the Republic of South Africa that in the interests of sport the projected visit of the racialist cricket team from South Africa is undesirable.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT (LORD KENNET)My Lords, the Government have made it clear on numerous occasions that in their view this visit is undesirable in the interests of sport generally. However, it is for the promoters to take a decision in the light of all the circumstances, but it is hoped that, even at this late stage, they will reconsider their decision.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, in thanking my noble friend for that Answer, may I ask him whether he is aware that many of us who love cricket and sport are now deeply concerned that 303 the very essence of sport and human achievement, irrespective of racial differences, should be preserved? And may I ask him whether the Minister of Sport has considered the effect on the Commonwealth Games if the teams of India, Africa and the Caribbean are withdrawn? Could not Her Majesty's Government, in addition to the expressions of opinion which have been made, make a direct contact with the South African Government to indicate how disastrous this visit will be upon sport?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I think it is clear that the tour may have serious consequences on sport in general, not least on the Commonwealth Games to be held later this year. There is, of course, no connection between the Commonwealth Games and other sporting events, and I hope that the threat to the Commonwealth Games can be averted. As to the question of a direct approach to the South African Government, that would be something in the nature of a diplomatic démarche, which is not, I think, usually made in the field of sport.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, does the Minister understand that interests far more important than those of mere sport are now involved? Does he not recognise that if lawful activities can be stopped by unlawful acts and threats individual liberty and the rule of law are ended?
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, arising out of that question, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that a great deal more than the future interests of sport are in danger here? There is the whole question of community relations in this country and elsewhere, and if that gets into the state which many of us envisage the rule of law will have gone.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, the Government are well aware of both those points.
§ LORD TAYLOR OF MANSFIELDMy Lords, could my noble friend say whether the Cricket Council have sought the advice of and had consultations with organised bodies in Britain, such as the British Council of Churches, the T.U.C. and the Council of Civil Liberties, on the projected tour?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I am not in a position to say what advice the 304 Cricket Council may have formally sought or formally received, but I believe there has been a great deal of informal consultation between the Council and various bodies of the nature my noble friend outlined.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, knowing the noble Lord's conventional high respect for terminological exactitude, may I ask him whether, since he has accepted the Question, he can give an indication of what exactly is meant by "racialist team"? And, in answering that, could he say whether any such term would in this connection be applied to an all-white team from Rhodesia, or from Russia, whose empire includes so many people of non-white character?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, it is my very respect for terminological exactitude which makes me realise that such words will carry different meanings to different people.
§ LORD BARNBYCould the noble Lord answer the second part of my question?
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, would not my noble friend agree that apartheid is not cricket?
§ LORD KENNETDefinitely.