§ 48. Mr. G. LAMBERTasked the Prime Minister whether Sir William Robertson and Sir Douglas Haig are considered the best men for their respective positions by the War Cabinet; if he is aware that attacks on these officers have appeared in the Press; and if he will prevent, in the interest of fair play and discipline, attacks being made on soldiers who have no opportunity of replying?
§ 51. Admiral of the Fleet Sir HEDWORTH MEUXasked whether, in view of the fact that much public uneasiness is being caused by the attacks made from time to time by a certain section of the Press upon high naval and military officers who are precluded by the rules of the Services from defending themselves, any steps can be taken by the Government to prevent the continuance of these attacks?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWAs long as generals or officers hold high positions under the Government it must he assumed that they 1146 retain the confidence of the Government, and the distinguished instances referred' to is these questions certainly form no exception to the rule.
As to the Press comments, I should like to take this opportunity of deprecating in the strongest possible manner discussions which have proceeded in the Press for some time past on questions of strategy and of the qualifications of individual officers, both of them questions unsuited' for public discussion, and very embarrassing to the Government in the discharge of very anxious and difficult duties.
Once these discussions begin, it is obvious that they can never be confined to one point of view, for, as the House knows, the criticism has not only taken the form indicated in these questions, but there has, on the contrary, been quite as much criticism of politicians for interfering with soldiers as of soldiers for the way in which they have carried out their duties.
The responsibility in these matters must rest with the Government for the time being, and they alone are in possession of the facts They cannot disclose them in answer to any criticism without injury to the public interest, and I would appeal to the Press on both sides to refrain from criticisms of this character, which are not merely unfair to public servants, but detrimental to the national interest.
§ Sir H. MEUXWill the right hon. Gentleman state if he means that Field-Marshal Sir Douglas Haig and General Sir William Robertson possesses the full confidence of His Majesty's Government?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe answer which I. have given stated that most specifically.
§ Sir H. CRAIKIf the appeal to the Press is not complied with, will the right hon. Gentleman instruct the Censor of the Press to take severe steps?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThat is a suggestion which is more easily made than carried out. I do not think that it would be any easier for the Government to deal with discussion of that kind in the Press than to deal with it in the House of Commons.
Mr. FABERCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether, as far as he is aware, any member of the present Government is behind these Press attacks?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWSo far as I am aware, no member of the Government is.
§ Mr. G. LAMBERTCan the right hon. Gentleman say why no member of the War Cabinet was here to defend Sir Douglas Haig last night?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWIt is very easy to answer that question. I stated publicly that, in my opinion, the discussion of this matter was not desirable. I do not see, therefore, why I should be called upon to listen.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIn view of the fact that a discussion was to take place, was it not necessary for a member of the War Cabinet to be here to state publicly the view of the War Cabinet, so that the public might be reassured as to the position, particularly in view of the present campaign, which is believed to be stimulated from 10, Downing Street?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI have already given a complete answer. I have stated the view of the War Cabinet on the subject, and part of that view was that a discussion was not desirable. That is all I say now.
Mr. KENNEDY JONESSince the right hon. Gentleman has explained that Field-Marshal Sir Douglas Haig has the entire confidence of the War Cabinet, will he inform the House what has happened since 1917 to bring that about, seeing that in January last he was made, by the order of the War Cabinet, subordinate to General Nivelle?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI do not admit the accuracy of the hon. Member's statement. Personally I deprecate in the strongest way the idea that it is necessary for the Government continually to give testimony as to the character of its servants.
§ Mr. RONALD McNEILL (by Private Notice)asked the Leader of the House if he will provide an early opportunity for the discussion of a Motion in the. following terms:
"That this House has confidence in the ability and competence of the General Staff and the Commander-in-Chief of the British Armies in France. and disapproves of attacks on those officers in Parliament and the Press, which, being based on unsubstantial rumour and ill-informed criticism, are calculated to undermine discipline in the Army and the public confidence in those responsible for the conduct of military operations?"
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI really do not think I can acid anything to the very full statement I have already given on this subject.
§ Mr. McNEILLDoes my right hon. Friend not think, in spite of the soundness of the general principle which he has expressed, that in view of the deplorable events of last night the House should have an opportunity of showing its real sense of this matter?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI think the House ought to realise the difficulty of this kind of procedure, which all arises from the kind of Press criticism which has taken place. It is quite obvious, I think—in the view of the Government, at all events—that discussion of these incidents is not desirable; and, further, although, of course, I have had no opportunity of consulting the Prime Minister, as I only received this notice when I came down, I think it would be very undesirable, and a very bad precedent, that the House should take into its awn hands the declaration of whether or not particular officers should be retained. That must be the responsibility of the Government.