ought to be defeated, and that in its place there should be a free coming together of the territories. Indeed I had played some part, with Sir Philip Mitchell, in the creation of the East Africa High Commission. There we had brought the territories together on an equal basis. We had given equality of representation to the various races in East Africa.
It therefore seemed to me a reasonable thing to bring together the three Central African territories on the basis of equality, and to let them shape the kind of services and the ultimate constitution that they themselves would require, with the Africans playing a part. But in this business the Africans were scarcely consulted. Even at some of the conferences called at Victoria Falls the Africans, although the vast majority in the territory, were completely ignored. When the Europeans were reminded of that, they said,"With this federation, in time the Africans will get used to it and accept it." But it was obvious that the opposition among the Africans was strong and deep.
I do not wish to go over the history of the past 10 years, but we are here witnessing once again the triumph of African nationalism, and the defeat of British imperialism. I say,"British imperialism" because in 1953 the concept was to give Southern Rhodesia authority and power to dominate Central Africa—to give her additional population and additional resources, together with an additional area over which to preside. That scheme has been totally defeated, although the majority of the inhabitants had been expected to accept it, and the then Government of this country had thought it to be a wise policy of racial partnership.
It was nothing of the kind. There was no racial partnership in the working of this Federation. Looking back over the history of the past 10 years we see that safeguard after safeguard in respect of the Africans was pushed on one side and ignored. The safeguards that we thought had been put into the Constitution of the territory were not there. The African Affairs Board collapsed. We remember the gathering opposition of the Africans and the resistance shown to any political advance in the three territories by the British Government and the Governments on the spot.
That is the history. It may have been that certain economic advantages have flown. But I contend that many of them now conceded to the Federation were advantages which would have come in any case had the Central African Council been allowed to develop and to bring into being the common services and economic changes contemplated at that time. I concede that there have been gains from federation, but do not let us imagine that the economic growth of Central Africa is due almost entirely to the structure of the Federation.
I go so far as to say that but for the fact that there was a Copper Belt and that tremendous revenue was coming from copper and going into the coffers of the Federation, things in Central Africa would have been very different. I played some part with Sir Roy Welensky and Sir Gilbert Rennie in bringing the royalties of the Copper Belt into public ownership, and in a few years 100 per cent. of those royalties will be the property of the State. Even now a considerable revenue accrues to the State as a result of the action taken by Sir Roy Welensky, Sir Gilbert Rennie and myself. It was that revenue from the Copper Belt which prevented Nyasaland from going bankrupt and give her the heavy subsidies needed to man her administration. It also prevented some of the distress which might have overtaken Southern Rhodesia.
I do not want to dwell too much on the past, but I wish to stress that today we are witnessing the inevitable and logical outcome of the policy of the past 10 years. I congratulate the First Secretary sincerely on the success of his negotiations. To have brought three or four Governments together and gained a measure of agreement among them regarding dissolution; to have got them thinking ahead in terms of collaboration—that is a great achievement and I pay my tribute to the First Secretary for having accomplished it.
As has been said, there are a number of very difficult problems ahead of us. It is all very well to get people talking, and they will have to talk, with regard to certain of the services. I agree with all that has been said about the public service and the need to safeguard it; the proper allocation of the forces and defence arrangements; the allocation of debts and the problems arising from taxation, British citizenship and so on. I hope that the discussions which are taking place to
