Page:MALAYSIA BILL RHODESIA AND NYASALAND BILL (2) (Hansard, 11 Juli 1963).djvu/29

 who bear responsibility in each of the territories of Central Africa, to promote feelings of partnership and of toleration by all parties. I was glad indeed that the hon. Member for Dundee, East echoed that note in his conclusion.

I ought to mention what the Bill does not deal with, because this is important. It does not deal in any shape or form with any question of Southern Rhodesian independence. It does not deal in any way with the convention which the United Kingdom Parliament has always observed since the middle of the 19th century, namely, that we do not legislate for self-governing Colonies without their consent. The application of this convention to any particular Colony has always depended upon the stage of development of self-government which that Colony has reached. But it has been clearly recognised that the convention applies to Southern Rhodesia, both in June 1961, in the White Paper then issued, and in the recent correspondence between my right hon. Friend the First Secretary and the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia.

This, of course, is not a matter with which the Bill attempts to deal in any way. It may be that it will be relevant for discussion at another time, but certainly it is not relevant for discussion on the Bill. Nor does the Bill deal with any Amendments of the constitutions of any of the territories. Clause 1(2,e) of the Bill expressly excepts territorial constitutions from the provisions of the Order in Council which may be made. Most of the constitutions are instruments made under Acts of Parliament, and there would probably be no power in any event under the Bill, in our view, to amend these constitutions because, except in so far as minor adjustments of the wording would be necessary as consequential on the end of Federation, there would be no power to make an Order in Council affecting these constitutions under the Bill. But it was thought necessary that this matter should be clarified in the course of the Bill, and that is why Clause 1(2,e) deals with this problem.

This is not an attempt to avoid the problems which have been discussed so much, because I want to deal with them, but I thought it necessary first to disentangle the purposes of the Bill from the problem. I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) was right when he said that the question of the independence of Southern Rhodesia had been the nub of the debate today, and, indeed, it was quite plainly the problem which was particularly affecting the minds of most speakers who took part in the debate. May I try to clarify the position, therefore, in this way? It appears first of all from the letters which were exchanged between my right hon. Friend and the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia. On 2nd May my right hon. Friend the First Secretary wrote that, despite the convention to which I have referred. "the Government of the United Kingdom will want to discuss with yourself"—" that is the Southern Rhodesian Government— "whether and in what respect the powers of amendment of the Southern Rhodesian constitution by the Southern Rhodesian legislature should be exercised." Perhaps I may remind the House that in the last letter that passed from my right hon. Friend on 14th June, 1963, there was this passage: "You will remember that when we met in London we discussed possible amendments which might be made by your Government to the Southern Rhodesian Constitution which would result in broadening the basis of representation in the Legislature and would take effect as soon as practicable. We also discussed the future development of policy on non-discrimination. So far as we are concerned, these matters remain for further discussion." That is still the position and there is no change from it as at today.

The hon. Member for Dundee, East and other hon. Members asked whether any secret pledges or undertakings were given to the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia during the course of the meetings at Victoria Falls. I am authorised by my right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State to say that no such secret pledges or undertakings were given and that the conversations which took place were simply an examination of the problem, without any undertakings or pledges being given by him.

Several hon. Members raised the question of constitutional advance in Northern Rhodesia. I am informed that the Governor of Northern Rhodesia is at present engaged in talks with the two parties and with the Opposition and he will let my right hon. Friend know what the reaction from the two parties and the Opposition is to the proposals which are under discussion for changes in the Constitution. No decision can be taken as to how we should proceed or what