§ 2.56 p.m.
§ 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 what progress has been made in respect of the claim of the people of Ocean Island:
- (1) for a settlement of compensation for damage caused by phosphate extraction; and
- (2) for separate status from the Gilbertese Islands and association with the Fijian Islands.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, in a Statement on 27th May 1977, in another place, my right honourable friend announced an ex gratia offer by the British, Australian and New Zealand Governments, of 10 million Australian dollars to establish a fund to help secure the Banabans' economic future. The terms of this offer have not yet been accepted by the Banabans, but it remains open. On the second point, I hope that the recently elected Gilberts Government, and a new Rabi Council of Leaders, will before long be able to hold discussions on matters of mutual interest, including the constitutional future of Banaba. as Ocean Island is now to be called.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, in thanking the Minister for that information, I should like to ask whether he 878 agrees that what has happened to Ocean Island—once beautiful, and now not much more than a desert—is one of the great tragedies of our time. Does he think that a total compensation for damages which amounts to less than £8 million, when over £60 million has been made from phosphate to the profit of Britain, Australia and New Zealand, is adequate compensation for the suffering they have undergone?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I join my noble friend in acknowledging that there have been a number of tragedies in the past, arising from what is variously called colonialism and imperialism—but not exclusively by the British Government or the British people, and not exclusively in the past by any country. However, we recognise that the Banaban community needs to have their economic future assured so far as possible. Therefore, in conjunction with our partners (Australia and New Zealand) we have offered them an ex gratia sum—notwithstanding the fact that the courts found against them in a prolonged action—of 10 million Australian dollars. Added to a sum which has been offered to them on another account, in regard to two other actions, by the phosphates company itself, and the fact that in the last three years at least they have received another 11 million Australian dollars from phosphates, this makes up a very substantial caucus for either investment or development, or both, on the Island.
In addition to the financial provision we have offered, we have also said that we stand totally ready to assist them by way of advice—technical and otherwise—to make the best use of this very considerable sum. I look forward to the time when their Council will have agreed to take up this very substantial sum of money and to accept, also, our offer to assist them by way of constructive advice as to how best to use it.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, when the noble Lord says that these Islanders lost their litigation, could he also tell us whether Her Majesty's Government were very pleased with the judgment which came? Did it not disclose conduct of almost unbelievable disgracefulness by some officers employed by Her Majesty's Government; and was 879 not the sole reason why the court could not find for the Islanders because there was not, in its view, a legal liability, as the Government were protected by the old doctrines?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, my noble friend is himself a lawyer and a distinguished Queen's Counsel. He will understand that when people go to law they are expected to accept the decision at law. This was a prolonged case which took something between 12 and 18 months to be heard. It entailed the most extraordinarily detailed inquiry into a very complicated matter; and the upshot was that, despite a good deal of popular support for the case of the Banabans, which is understandable, the Vice-Chancellor nevertheless found against them. Her Majesty's Government might have stood on that, but we did not. We approached our other two partners—and I wish noble Lords would remember all the time that Britain is not the only Commonwealth country involved in this matter, either in the mistakes of the past or in the attempts at redress in the future—and they agreed (and, from this Box, I pay testimony to the generous statsmanship of both Australia and New Zealand in the in the way they agreed) that, with Britain, they should make available a very substantial sum of money, despite the findings of the court. I think this is the action of countries which, whatever the faults of the past, are anxious to build in the future; and I would hope for united support for what the three Commonwealth Governments are trying to do for this community in the Pacific.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, returning to the second part of my Question, may I ask whether it is not the case that the Banaban people resist association with the newly-independent Gilbert Islands and desire, instead, association with Fiji, which has very generously given them hospitality while they have been in exile? Should not that wish of the Banaban people be respected?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the Banaban community removed to Rabi Island at the end of the last war and because of the consequences of the last war—and those, at least, cannot be 880 laid at the doors of any allied Government. They confirmed a decision to settle in Rabi Island, with the generous assistance of the Fiji Government; and there they are now. They have a Council, which is now in process of being elected or re-elected, which I hope will join hands with the Gilberts Government—there is a new Assembly, a new Government, in the Gilberts, by the way—so that between them (and they are a naturally friendly people, cognate in many ways with each other) they will arrive at a compromise solution. We have made our own suggestions to them as to how to resolve, on the one hand, the Banaban objection to remaining within the Gilberts' ambit and, on the other hand, the Gilberts' reluctance to surrender any part of what they regard as their territory, supported as that attitude is throughout the whole of the archipelagic Pacific, where everybody is afraid of further fragmentation. I hope that these discussions between the Council and the Gilberts Government will shortly reach agreement. We stand ready to assist in every way. We have made our own suggestions, but they can be no more than suggestions. Our strong advice is on a par with what my noble friend has said: that these two communities, which have so much in common, should themselves put forward a compromise solution.