Skip to main content

Bechuanaland

Volume 643: debated on Thursday 6 July 1961

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Water Supplies

9.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will state approximately the cost of procuring adequate water supplies in Bechuanaland; what surveys for this purpose have been made: whether the provision of water is to be confined to the area of the new administrative capital; and what is the number of the staff that will be transferred from Mafeking as soon as water, other essential services and accommodation have been made available.

It is not possible to estimate the cost of procuring adequate water supplies in the Bechuanaland Protectorate until it is known what underground resources exist and the reliability of surface water supplies has been proved. The High Commissioner allocated £725,000 in the five-year development period 1955–60 to the development of underground and surface water supplies throughout the Territory. A sum of £450,000 is being spent in the current development period on the continuation of this work. This includes the cost of surveys, not only for potential sites for a new administrative capital but for the Territory as a whole, since water is a pre-requisite of general economic development.

It is estimated that about 200 staff will be moved from Mafeking.

While I appreciate fully the very great difficulties in this matter, may I ask whether that Answer means that every endeavour will be made to provide an adequate water supply other than in the contemplated capital?

United Nations Mission

16.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what conditions have been imposed on the United Nations mission in the Bechuanaland Protectorate.

17.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what restrictions as regards location have now been placed on the United Nations mission to South-West Africa whilst in Bechuanaland.

In telling the Chairman of the South-West Africa Committee that we would do what we could to meet his requests for certain transport and accommodation facilities in Bechuanaland, we imposed no restrictions or conditions upon the Committee's activities within the Protectorate. It was, however, made clear to the Chairman that in granting these requests it was our understanding that the Committee did not intend to enter South-West Africa from Bechuanaland without the permission of the South African Government.

But what is this Committee doing in Bechuanaland? When the administering Power in South-West Africa is unwilling to receive the mission what is the purpose of its presence in Bechuanaland, especially as there is danger of its embroiling us with the South African authorities whose good will, whether we like it or not, is necessary to the economy of the High Commission Territories?

The Committee said it wished to visit the territory in implementation of the General Assembly resolution, and later in Bechuanaland proposed to visit Herero residents originally from South-West Africa. On that basis we saw no objection to the visit for this specific purpose.

While welcoming the opportunities given in Bechuanaland, may I ask whether this mission is not instructed to go to South-West Africa by the United Nations, and are not the Government of the Union of South Africa defying that decision of the United Nations? Why should we not give all possible facilities for the mission to visit South-West Africa even if it is from the territory of our Protectorate?

We are not responsible for the Government of South Africa, but the Committee made no submission to us that it intended to eater South-West Africa at the time of its request for facilities in the Bechuanaland Protectorate. We have since asked the chairman to confirm our understanding that the Committee will not attempt to enter South-West Africa from the Protectorate without permission.

Because we are responsible for the Protectorate. We have granted such facilities as we have been asked for within the Protectorate. I think that it is reasonable to expect the Committee to agree to our request not to go beyond the border.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is highly desirable that this Committee should visit Bechuanaland, because there it will find large numbers of refugees who have been driven out of South-West Africa and so will be able to collect a great deal of valuable information? If this Committee should make a further request to the Government, may we express the hope that the Government would receive it with courtesy and common sense equal to that which they have shown on this occasion?