CONFIDENTIAL
found
canvassed and, if my recollection serves në) some support (including support from Krs. White then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State in the Colonial Office) that integrating territories might have representation in the House of Lords. This would give them a voice within the British Parliament without upsetting party balances in the Commons; and it was envisaged that particular periods during the year might be set aside during which the affairs of integrating overseas territories might be given special attention.
3. My point is by now I hope obvious. If, as I believe, we may in the end have envisaged integration for some few dependent territories, it might well make sense to deal with the problem of representation at Westminster by proposing representation in the House of Lords, If this "oard" had already been played in relation to territories still dependent, it would clearly have less attraction and less chance of proving satisfactory sa part of any integration deal. For this reason, in addition to those quoted in your draft memorandum, I would think it better not now to envisage having peers from British dependent terri- teries,
∙ith regard to paragraph 5 of your draft seGRO- randum, I would not regard the objection at (1) as in any sense overriding. “here seems to me no reason why some peers should not be given a representative basis; surely one of the uses made of the arrangements for the appointment of life peers is to inject into the house of Lords experience and skilla of relevenea to matters which the house has to discuss; if Colonial representative peers were appointed, they would, presumably, have just such experience of and skill in matters concerning Colonial administration.
5. I agree with point (ii) in your paragraph 5 except so far as Hong Kong is concerned. Surely Hong Kong is such a special case that one could reasonably leave it out of any such arrangonent?
6. As to (111) in your paragraph 5, I can see the difficulty; but to take up your example, since you quote 7131, I would not have thought it essential that there should be a Fiji Indian at well as a Fijian peer. in some cases certainly one would hope that it would be possible to find a suitable indivi- dual who vas sufficiently independent of differing political or racial interests in a territory to make him adequately acceptable to ell concerned as the representative peer for that territory,
7.
As to point (iv) in your paragraph 5, I do not think that it is at all a foregone conclusion that any such peers appointed would be "vociferous critics of the British Government'a policy towards their om territory"; that very much depends on who is chosen and you point out in paragraph 4(v) that nomination would be in the hands of the British Prime Minister. As to the rest of the pointe wađe in your para» graph 5(iv) (leaving ašide the final parenthesis), surely this is not so much an objection as very much part of the reason why one would even consider having such peers at all
/8.
CONFIDENT I AL