z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-10.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 777
EVIDENCE : RIGHT HON. SIR SAMUEL HOARE AND OTHERS 777
retire because he has really been suffering under the new conditions, and does not really want to take advantage of this rule ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: We can consider a suggestion of that kind. 1 assume Dr. Ambedkar’s suggestion refers to the new entrants ?
11,670. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Yes, I am talking of the new entrants. In that case the Secretary of State may retain in his own hands a certain amount of discretion which he may exercise in favour of a man who has genuinely proved to the Secretary of State and his advisers that the reasons of his retirement is discontent and dissatisfaction with the new conditions ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: I should like to consider a suggestion of that kind. The doubt that is in my mind is whether the mere fact that there is this discretion will take away the assurance from the mind of the parent, or the university, or the school from which the young man is coming, but I will consider it.
†12,025. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I want to ask one question, Sir Samuel, on these provisions in general. The ultimate purpose of these previous sanction rules would also of course be achieved by the power of veto—the subsequent power of veto which the Viceroy, and the Governors have got; so, from that point of view, there is really not much to be gained by these provisions. I mean although the Viceroy may give his previous sanction he is not thereby bound to adopt the Bill when it is finally passed; he has the power of veto. So, from that point of view, there is not much to be gained by the rules of previous sanction, which could not ultimately be gained by the power of veto ?
Sir Samuel Hoare : I am not sure that I should agree with Dr. Ambedkar. The veto is a sanction of a somewhat different kind. It seems to me it is a bigger and more serious sanction. It comes after the Legislature has formally pledged itself to certain proposals ; I think therefore it is a more serious sanction.
12,026. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Apart from all that, so far as the main object is to prevent anything affecting adversely the special responsibilities of the Viceroy, the veto is an effective measure ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: I was just coming to that second consideration. The veto has a long history behind it, and judged by British experience generally, the veto becomes more and more in course of time something in the nature of a constitutional formality.
12,027. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: But what I wanted to say was this. So far as I am able to judge the only distinction that one could draw between the effect of a previous sanction rule and ultimate veto is that the one, namely, the previous sanction, prevents discussion, while the veto does not. Is that not so ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: It is a difference.
†Minutes of Evidence, Vol. II-B, 5th October 1933, pp. 1118-19.