Page:MALAYSIA BILL RHODESIA AND NYASALAND BILL (2) (Hansard, 11 Juli 1963).djvu/21

 9.4 p.m.

Mr. Patrick Wall (Haltemprice)

The hon. Member for Wednesbury (Mr. Stonehouse) would probably be surprised if I say that I entirely support the fears that he mentioned in the penultimate part of his speech. I, too, fear that the breaking up of this racial experiment in Central Africa will spread racial division not only throughout that continent, but through other continents, too. The hon. Member suggested that China might lead the coloured races against the whites, and I feel that that is possible. It is the biggest nightmare that the world faces. The policy advocated by the hon. Member for Wednesbury, however, would make that nightmare more likely than ever. If he expects the Europeans in Southern Africa to submit to one man one vote, leading to immediate African rule, when we have the example of what is happening in other African States, he must be living in cloud-cuckoo land.

I have only a few minutes at my disposal and I cannot, therefore, follow the various suggestions of the hon. Member. I join, however, with the many hon. Members, on both sides, who have congratulated my right hon. Friend the First Secretary. I believe that he had a nasty inheritance when he took over as First Secretary and Minister for Central African Affairs. My fear was that a vacuum would be created in Central Africa owing to one or other of the participants refusing to attend the Conference and that other outside Powers might take advantage of the vacuum, as happened in the Congo. My right hon. Friend's power of negotiation has brought the parties together in a conference which, as a conference, has been a success.

I am glad also that the House has dealt with the problem rather in terms of a Dunkirk and certainly not as an Alamein. It is a sad time and what my right hon. Friend has done has not been to snatch victory from defeat, but, at least, he has prevented defeat, in the same way as Dunkirk was no defeat for British arms. We all owe my right hon. Friend a great debt for having done that.

I should have liked to refer to future problems in Central Africa, but these have already been adequately covered by hon. Members on both sides. They include the problems of the Federal Civil Service and the federal debt. Let us not forget that the British taxpayer will probably shoulder quite a large part of the federal debt, as he will have to pay great sums for Nyasaland, in spite of the fact that we were told that this was not likely. That is fairly certain to happen and I believe that the sum required for Nyasaland will be considerably more than we have been led to expect.

I agree that we must do everything we can to maintain economic links between the three territories. One of the best hopes for the future is the continued development of the University of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, or whatever it is to be called in the future, at Salisbury. This is vital for a reasonable understanding between the races. I hope that we do not see Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia building up their own complete universities. I know that they are doing so already, but they will, I hope, recognise that these territorial universities should offer certain degrees preliminary to students attending the central university for higher-level degrees.

The nub of this debate has been the future of Southern Rhodesia. What we want to know are the terms on which Southern Rhodesia will get its independence. One great advantage from this debate is that the right hon. Member for Middlesbrough, East (Mr. Bottomley) made clear—if I am wrong, I hope he will correct me—that the terms on which the Southern Rhodesia Government would receive independence from the Opposition would be one man, one vote immediately, or something very close to that, and that if these terms were not given, as this House of Commons has no power to intervene in the internal affairs of Southern Rhodesia, the Labour Party would use the one remaining power of suspending the Constitution. That message has, I am sure, gone out to Southern Rhodesia and I hope that it will be fully understood. Unfortunately, it seems that a number of hon. Members on this side of the House support that view. I do not believe it to be the view of the vast majority of Conservatives, either in this House or in the country. I do not believe that Southern Rhodesia should get her independence with the same Constitution as she enjoys today. I believe that Sir Edgar Whitehead was going in the right direction. The Land Apportionment Act should go not immediately but