Round The Colonies

Mauritius Times – 70 Years

By Peter Ibbotson

Developments in, and news from, other parts of the Commonwealth indicate that the present Whitehall Government is not whole-heartedly behind its proclaimed policy of colonial emancipation. Nor is it being as generous towards all colonies as one would expect. Let us examine one or two cases in point.

British Honduras has just been the scene of two inquiries and reports. One was an electoral report presented by Sir Hilary Blood, tending to the political development of the colony. Sir Hilary, when in Mauritius, advocated proportional representation so that all shades of political opinion would have — he claimed — the opportunity of representation in Council. This proposal was rejected, due to the powerful anti-PR advocacy of the Labourites. In British Honduras, however, Sir Hilary did not recommend the introduction of proportion into the voting system; one wonders why.

If Sir Hilary were convinced of the necessity of proportional representation as a principle, one would have expected him to suggest its introduction into all colonies where he was sent as a constitutional or electoral adviser. If, however, he was not so convinced, why did he recommend it for Mauritius some years ago? Was, after all, the PR proposal for Mauritius simply a device (as at the time we suggested in these columns) to prolong the capitalists’ power and to keep the Labour Party out of power? The differing proposals for Mauritius and British Honduras would seem to add support to this.

Also, from British Honduras comes an economic report from Mr Jack Downie, a senior economic adviser from the Treasury. Mr Downie recommended certain levels of services and expenditure in the hope that they would be called upon to provide for a greater number of people than the present population of British Honduras. In other words, Mr Downie was expecting that the immigration programme would be fulfilled. The cost of his proposals amounted to 41.5 million dollars, say Rs 97 million or £8.5 million. At this stage, H.M. Government has agreed to grant 5.75 million dollars, about Rs 12 million or a little more than £ 1.25 million, over the next four years.

In other words, Whitehall is prepared to underwrite the British Honduras development plan over the next four years to the extent of rather more than one-eighth of its cost; this is in addition to the total of £5.5 million granted to the colony since 1945. And the total population of British Honduras is only 85,000! No one wishes to detract from the importance of ending or ameliorating the extreme poverty of the country, but the fact remains that the country has been treated extremely generously, more generously perhaps than any other colony, since the war; and it can justifiably be argued that it is time for other colonies to be treated equally generously. Mauritius, for one, could do with treatment on an equally favourable financial scale.

The favourable treatment of British Honduras stems, I would suggest, from a desire to stave off incipient Communism. At one time, when Guatemala was governed by a democratic government headed by President Jacobo Arbenz, the Colonial Office trumped up allegations against the People’s United Party (PUP) in British Honduras, alleging that the PUP was seeking to tie up with the allegedly Communist government of Guatemala. Since then, there has been a revolution in Guatemala, and with United States aid the dictatorship of Miguel Ydígoras Fuentes has usurped power. Little is heard, therefore, of the ‘Communist’ tendencies of the PUP nowadays, but the fear of a very left-wing government remains, hence the desire to give plenty of financial aid so as to buy off the poverty-stricken Hondurans.

Speaking of Sir Hilary Blood, it is noteworthy that he is being kept very busy now that he has “retired”. From British Guiana, he goes to Zanzibar; there to consult representative members of the Legislative Council and other leaders of public opinion and to make thereafter recommendations for constitutional advance. But he is inhibited from recommending proportional representation in Zanzibar, for his terms of reference in reviewing the present constitutional position definitely lay down that “there should be no change for the present in the franchise”, i.e. there should be no change in qualifications for having a vote, and no change in the method of how one exercises that vote.

Dr Cheddi Jagan taking the oath of office in British Guiana on October 9, 1992

If the Colonial Office is tender towards British Honduras, the same cannot be said for its attitude towards British Guiana. The series of talks between H.M. Government and British Guianese leaders recently held in London, ended in compromise and deadlock. Dr Cheddi Jagan said after the conference had ended: “We are far from satisfied… We came here with a mandate for independence. We are going back still as Colonials with a Crown Colony status. The result of this conference is clearly imposition by discussion… We hold ourselves free at all times to take all constitutional measures to achieve independence as quickly as possible.” Dr Jagan’s ministerial colleagues Hon Benn and Hon Rai concurred with this; so, did his fellow MLC’s on the constitutional delegation, Mr Burnham and Mr Singh.

Very slowly the British government is moving towards a realisation that British Guina wants independence within the Commonwealth, but it is delaying the grant of independence as long as possible. If the Guianese political parties lose patience, then HMG will be able to suspend the constitution once more and say: “There you are, look how right we were to withhold independence from such an irresponsible bunch of hotheads.” But the British Guiana talks have given Guiana one thing, at least, which Mauritius lacks — the title of Premier for the MLC who in the Governor’s judgment was best able to command the confidence of a majority of members of the Council, with the other Ministers appointed on the advice of the Premier. Prorogation, and dissolution of Council would also be on the advice or request of the Premier.

So, although British Guiana is being discriminated against in the matter of having independence delayed without good cause, we see how its proposed constitution is nonetheless in advance, in some particulars, than the constitution of Mauritius.

7th Year – No 295
Friday 22th April, 1960

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 14 February 2025