CAB129-78 — Page 201

Full Parliamentary Representation

75. In examining the proposals put before us by the two main Maltese parties we have been left in no doubt about the objections and difficulties seen by many people, both in the United Kingdom and in Malta, to offering Malta full representation in the Parliament at Westminster. These objections were made to us with force and authority, and we do not treat them lightly. Indeed, we consider it our duty to bring them to the attention of Her Majesty's Government and Parliament, so that their decision on this complex and delicate issue may be taken in the light of all the relevant circumstances.

76. We have considered, first, whether there is any merit in the contention that Maltese Members of Parliament, necessarily very few in number, could have little or no influence on the proceedings of the House, and would thus suffer from feelings of frustration and discontent. Similar feelings are not wholly absent from the minds of many of the Members elected for United Kingdom constituencies, but we are sure that they would be the first to agree that the opportunities for individual Members to express views and to safe- guard the interests of constituents, are a guarantee of democratic freedom. Nor did we find convincing the argument that these few Members from Malta would be able to exploit the balance of power, if Government and Opposition were evenly divided.

Implications of Representation

77. Fears have been expressed to us about the possible repercussions elsewhere of admission to Westminster of representatives from Maltese constituencies. Such repercussions, it has been said, might take the form of claims from Colonial territories which, owing to their small size, lack of natural resources or for other reasons, see no prospects of achieving the normal form of constitutional development, to be accorded a status similar to that of Malta. The claim by Malta to representation at Westminster is based on, and justified by, the quite exceptional circumstances and position of Malta. For this reason, we do not consider that claims from other quarters should arise which cannot be dealt with on their own merits.

78. We are, however, bound to feel concern about the anxieties of a substantial section of the Maltese people regarding the suggestion that the two countries should be brought closer together by the link of representation at Westminster. We have outlined earlier in our Report the fears expressed on the one hand, and the assurances given on the other, about the maintenance of the position of the Roman Catholic faith in Malta. We do not wish to involve ourselves in this question, which in our view is one for the Maltese people themselves; but we have a number of general observations to make on it.

79. As we understand the position, there is unanimous desire in Malta for an improvement of economic and social conditions. Similarly, there is widespread agreement on the need for the close association of Malta with the United Kingdom. It is only with regard to the form of that association, and the particular issue of representation, that any fears are entertained about the possible long-term effects on social and religious life in Malta. So far as the Parliament at Westminster is concerned, we do not see that the presence of Maltese Members, elected by a Maltese people devoted to their laws and institutions, would lessen, in regard to religious matters, the restraint and

20

Page 201

Page 201

202

respect which the Parliament at Westminster has shown for the last 150 years.* We consider that on the basis recommended in paragraph 85 below, the Maltese Farmen holdemain responsible for legisigfon on all domestic affairs and, in particular, on such matters as the position of the Church, education, and family life. Moreover, although the representatives of the Conference were able to discuss the matter with the Archbishop of Malta only on a hypothetical basis, they felt entitled to give him assurances that, in their opinion, the Maltese Parliament would continue, under any new constitutional arrangement which could be envisaged, to exercise authority in all fields in which the Church is directly concerned, and that the Parliament at Westminster had no desire whatever to intervene in such fields and, following its long-standing tradition, would not so intervene.

Decision for the Maltese

80. Finally, we recognise that a decision to grant representation for Malta in the Parliament at Westminster would not meet the wishes expressed to us by the representatives of a large section of the Maltese electorate. Our sole concern is to devise the best means of meeting the aspirations of the Maltese people, subject to their acceptance of necessary limitations in the fields of defence and foreign affairs, for a higher ultimate constitutional status and a greater stability in future. The offer of representation at Westminster would be a recognition by the people of the United Kingdom that they and the people of Malta should enjoy equality of status. Common membership of the Parliament at Westminster, the highest authority under the Crown, which ultimately controls both our destinies, would make this equality manifest and meet the realities of the situation. However, it is for the Maltese people themselves to determine and to demonstrate clearly and unmistakably whether the proposals of the Maltese Government do indeed correspond to their own wishes.

81. If the principle of representation at Westminster were to be accepted by the Maltese people and by Her Majesty's Government and Parliament at Westminster, the detailed implementation would have to be worked cut in consultation between the two Governments. We confine ourselves to stating two considerations which we think must guide such further elaboration. First, having regard to the basis on which the separate parts of the United Kingdom are represented in Parliament and the size of the Maltese electorate, there should be three Maltese representatives at Westminster. Secondly, Maltese representatives should be elected in exactly the same way, and under the same laws governing representation of the people and electoral practices, as are Members from the United Kingdom.

82. We conclude that representation at Westminster is practicable and reasonable, and, subject to the considerations mentioned above, we recommend its acceptance by Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and by the Parliament at Westminster.

Further Constitutional Changes

66

83. We were requested by our terms of reference to consider consti- tutional and related questions arising from proposals for closer association between Malta and the United Kingdom and, in particular, from the proposal

* I agree with this view on the assumption that our recommendation, that the Maltese Parliament remain responsible for such matters as the position of the Church, education and family life, is carried out, and on the assumption that appropriate and satisfactory assurances are provided in connection with any new constitutional arrangement.