asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he proposes to send to East Africa any Colonial Office official or other person to inquire into the questions arising out of the Report of the East Africa Commission; if so, whom he proposes to send and when; into what subjects the inquiries are to be made; and whether such person will have power to negotiate on his behalf as well as to make inquiries?

I hope to make a statement on this matter at the end of questions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what action is contemplated by the Government with regard to the recommendations of the Report of the recent Commission on Closer Union in East Africa (Cmd. 3234), and what machinery is proposed for giving effect to his undertaking that local opinion in East Africa will be consulted before any final commitments are entered into.

I propose to ask Sir Samuel Wilson, the Permanent Under-Secretary of State at the Colonial Office, to proceed to East Africa as soon as possible in order to discuss the recommendations of the Hilton Young Commission for the closer union of Kenya, Tanganyika and Uganda, and such possible modifications of these proposals for effecting the object in view as may appear desirable, with the Governments concerned and also with any bodies or individuals representing the various interests and communities affected, with a view to seeing how far it may be possible to find a basis of general agreement. It will be his task to ascertain on what lines a scheme for closer union would be administratively workable and otherwise acceptable, and to report the outcome of his consultations. His report obviously will not be available until after the General Election, but any proposals for action arising out of it will, in so far as the present Government are concerned, be submitted to Parliament before any final decision is taken.

Do I gather that that answer means clearly that Sir Samuel Wilson will have no power to commit the Government in any way and that the one object of his mission is merely to ascertain local facts; and, further, is it clearly understood that the proposed residence of the High Commissioners is not to be a subject of his inquiry?

Sir Samuel Wilson will not commit the Government or Parliament in any way. His object is merely to ascertain, as I have already stated, on what terms closer union could be made workable and could be made acceptable. No particular question like that of the whereabouts of the capital is excluded from his consideration.

The position then is clear, that, when the new Parliament reassembles, nothing arising out of Sir Samuel Wilson's mission will prejudice in any way the action of any Government called upon to deal with it, and that, before even the Government deals with it, Parliament will have an opportunity of considering it?

The liberty of action of any Government is quite unfettered.

May I ask whether the present investigations will also cover the question of the franchise; as to whether it should be a common franchise or a communal franchise?

That question may be brought to the notice of Sir Samuel Wilson, but the hon. Member is aware of the policy of His Majesty's Government on that matter.

Do I understand that if representations are made to Sir Samuel Wilson, he will also cover in his investigation local feeling with regard to the franchise?

Yes, local feeling in every community concerned, but a change of policy can only result from general agreement.