§ 18. Mr. GODFREY LOCKER-LAMPSONasked how many of the witnesses have now indicated their consent to the publication of their evidence before the Committee on Irish Finance?
§ Mr. BIRRELLReplies have been received from twenty-five out of the twenty-eight witnesses. Of these fourteen offer no objection to the publication of their evidence, eight, comprising the majority of the Irish official witnesses, object on principle to the publication of evidence given on the understanding that it would be treated as confidential, and three prefer on various grounds that their evidence should not be published. With regard to the Irish official witnesses, to whom assurance had been given of strict confidence, I feel bound to add that in my opinion they have good ground for complaint at the course which, under Parliamentary pressure, has been taken; for it is obvious that by refusing their consent to publication they expose themselves to party imputations and baseless conjectures as to the nature of their evidence. However, notwithstanding what has passed, I shall withhold from publication the evidence of those witnesses who object, and the rest will be published.
Mr. CATHCART WASONWill the right hon. Gentleman consider whether it will be fair to publish any portion whatever of this evidence unless there is a general publication of the whole?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Gentleman knows that, with an importunity worthy 1337 of a better cause, questions have been put not only to me, but to the Prime Minister and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with the result that a promise has been given, which promise must be kept, that the evidence of those persons who do not object shall be published. Certain evidence, as I say, will not be published. I was only saying that I rather sympathise with those Civil servants who feel that by withholding their evidence from publication they are exposing themselves to the suggestion of having said something of a most alarming character, whereas if it were published it would be seen to be something quite different.
§ Mr. W. O'BRIENDoes not the right hon. Gentleman think that that would be very much like a farce—"Hamlet" without the Prince—to publish these unofficial statements when the all-important statements of the officials are suppressed?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI am sorry to say that they are not all-important, and I am only sorry that the whole of the evidence will not be published, as I am perfectly certain I should hear no more about it. As a matter of fact a promise has been given, and I am not in a position to go back upon it. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I should be perfectly willing to allow him, or anybody, to see the evidence of the official persons: there is no mystery at all about it. The evidence that will be published will be submitted to Members of the House, and I hope that some of them will read it.
§ Mr. W. O'BRIENDoes not the right hon. Gentleman think that if he makes the same statement to the official witnesses that he has just made to the House of his own feeling in this matter, that they will be very easily induced to forego their objections?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not know but what there is a good deal in what the hon. Gentleman says. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I have put no pressure whatever upon any witness, either to give or to withhold his evidence; and I do not think that these official witnesses really mind a bit whether the evidence is published or not. But they feel—and I do not wonder at it—that they feel on behalf of the Civil Service, having given their evidence on the assurance that it should be treated as confidential, that it is asking rather too much that owing to a Parliamentary exigency it should be given.
§ Colonel YATEWould the right hon. Gentleman say why the assurance was given?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThere are eighty questions still awaiting answer.