CONIDENTIAL
There could be petitions demanding his recall. Third, it
is conceivable that a Governor, as leader of his local
community, might sympathise with the popular demand and seek to disregard the wishes expressed by the Secretary
of State in the answer to the PQ. News of a conflict of
opinion would be damaging to us. In these circumstances
we would have to assign such a Governor to other duties.
If asked in Parliament what we would do if such a case
were to arise, we would say that the question was
hypothetical, but that we had no doubt that Governors
would take full account of the wishes of the UK
Parliament in reaching their decisions.
9. I do not think our answer to the proposed PQ should
volunteer that we do not intend to introduce UK
legislation to abolish capital punishment in the
Dependent Territories. I believe that we should retain
the threat to proceed by Order in Council if experience
shows that the use of an answer to an inspired PQ proves
inadequate for our purposes.
10. With regard to Mr Lavity Stoutt, I propose once our
policy is agreed, to reply on your behalf, copied to the
other Chief Ministers, shortly before the PQ is
published. This will require careful handling and
timing, but the aim would be to reinforce our message in the House by a personal message. Meanwhile the department have instructed Governors to tell their Chief
Ministers to hold off from starting a line of
correspondence.
CONFIDENTIAL