§ 2.43 p.m.
Lord INGLEWOODMy 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 what representations they have recently made to the Government of South Africa to restore the franchise to the Cape coloured community.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have not recently made representations specifically on this subject to the South African Government. The Government have, however, on numerous occasions, made clear their total condemnation of South Africa's racial policies, which deny to the majority of her citizens basic human rights, including the right to vote.
Lord INGLEWOOD—the noble Lord—whether he would agree that progress can sometimes be made by taking one step at a time, and whether he does not think that there might be some advance if he suggested that this mistake in the late 1950s, when the Cape coloured were removed from the register, could perhaps be repaired and that that might have a more immediate effect than just lecturing and abusing South Africa, which Her Majesty's Government have now done for quite a long time and achieved absolutely nothing in return?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I hope the noble Lord and my noble friend will not deprive me of the title of "right honourable gentleman", even though he persists in calling me his noble friend. In answer to the supplementary question, it is not our policy to single out particular ethnic groups in our calls for a just and peaceful solution to the problems of South Africa, but I think the noble Lord's suggestion has the merit that we would all welcome advance against apartheid in any particular and in any direction, so long, of course, as the ultimate objective of an across-the-board advance is kept clearly in mind.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, can the noble Lord name any country in Africa in which anybody is allowed to vote for anybody except the Government?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not think that exactly arises from the Question put to me by the noble Lord, Lord Inglewood. We are addressing ourselves to a serious matter of how best to attain progress against apartheid in South Africa, which is a crucial country—some would say the most crucial country—in the whole of Africa.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether he would not agree that both the original Question and the supplementary asked by my noble friend suggest interference with the internal affairs of another country? May I also ask him, since, as he is well aware, liberalisation is very much under consideration, or "in the works", as is said, in South Africa, whether he would not agree that too hasty an action with regard to the vote for the Cape coloured—which we all agree should have been restored long ago—might well jeopardise, or at any rate retard, dealing with the more difficult question of the urban, de-tribalised Bantu?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not think that, on reflection, the noble Lord would persist in thinking that to draw the attention of the South African authorities, or indeed the authorities of any other country, to basic human rights, which are essential to the wellbeing of their own people and, 910 indeed, in the long term, to the peace of the world, is interference with their internal policies. As to his comments on the situation in South Africa, these are, as always, interesting but, as always, a matter for argument.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is not the case that Her Majesty's Government have supported resolutions on apartheid at the United Nations, which resolutions include the restoration of the vote to the coloured community, and does this not indicate clearly world opinion on this matter?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, indeed, my Lords. We have consistently supported the principle of the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa, as indeed we have supported all meaningful and practical resolutions directed against discrimination in any other country, in this respect, of course, the substantial purpose of the Question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Inglewood, has already been part of our efforts in the UN and, bilaterally, in what we have said to the South African authorities.
§ Lord VERNONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the 2 million Cape coloured are more disadvantaged than any other group of people in South Africa? The Africans at least have their Bantustans, however inadequate they may be; the Cape coloured have nothing. They have no land, and they have been deprived of the vote, as my noble friend has said. In view of our historical responsibility for these unfortunate people, is there not a case for the Government making special representations to the South African Government on the basis suggested by my noble friend?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I think there is a case so long as, as I emphasised at the beginning, we keep firmly in mind that we do not single out any special interest, race, colour, religion or any other category for what might be interpreted by others as a discriminatory emphasis. Certainly there is a case. As to the rest of the noble Lord's question, I think he is substantially correct, to this extent at least, that in many respects the Cape coloured are more disadvantaged than even the black Africans. With 911 regards to representation, for instance, it is true that they have only the bogus Representative Council, which has practically no powers; and, as he has said, they do not even enjoy the illusory advantages of the Bantustan principle, or even of the creation of a Transkei.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that when freedom was granted to South Africa it was granted on the express condition that within the shortest practicable period the franchise would be given to the African people, and that that assurance was repeated in the South African debate from both sides of the House and from both Front Benches?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, it is a fact that the 1907 reforms, and the Act that accompanied those reforms, contained very strong entrenched clauses. I am bound to say that I know of no comparable enactments in which the strongest entrenched clauses of this kind have survived the fact of independence.