Power to Provide for Constitution of Kiribati as Republic

Part of Clause 2 – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 11 June 1979.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Sir Raymond Gower Sir Raymond Gower , Barry 12:00, 11 June 1979

The hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Hooley) suggested that we are to be asked to pass this clause on the nod. As I read it, it is even worse than that, because the clause says: Her Majesty may by Order in Council (which shall be laid before Parliament after being made) … That is much worse than on the nod. In other words, we are being asked to look at it after the evil deed has been done. That is the situation, and if there is anything defective it will be too late for us to do anything about it. That is why this is vital. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is a second best. This is indeed such a modest amendment that I would have hoped that the Government—indeed, the two Front Benches, if I may so describe them—would be prepared to accept it.

We are asking only that Parliament shall have some means and right to examine these proposals in detail and, if necessary, to amend them. As my hon. Friend the Member for Essex, South-East (Sir B. Braine) said on the first amendment, the agreement of 1947, which was called a covenant, was entered into in response to certain undertakings that were given by the British Government of the day. Those undertakings guaranteed the right of these people to return to their ancestral homeland if they so desired. I appreciate that this is the difficulty of this kind of legislation, in that nothing that we can write into the Bill can preserve that right against a decision of the Gilbertese, as they will be a sovereign State. I may be wrong on that, but that is the way that I read it.

9.30 p.m.

As my hon. Friend has pointed out, however, it may be possible, after we have had an opportunity to examine the provisions in detail—they have been put in the Library, but so far few hon. Members have had an opportunity to see them—to frame safeguards that will be so prominent that they will become established in people's minds and in that way, over a period of time, stabilise the position.

We are asking only that we shall not be requested tonight to pass this objectionable clause as it stands. What is the use of the order being laid before Parliament after it has been made? What could Parliament do about it then? Is it designed just to give Parliament information? The order should be tabled in such a way as to give Parliament a genuine opportunity to debate it. When it is passed it cannot be revoked, and so there will be nothing that Parliament can do about it.

I hope that the Minister will consider this minor and reasonable proposal to be one to which he cannot object, and I hope that he will agree to its incorporation in the Bill.