HC Deb 24 February 1926 vol 192 cc501-3
23. Sir ROBERT HAMILTON

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the evidence taken by and the report of the court of inquiry into the loss of the "Hampshire" has been published?

18. Mr. HANNON

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the late Lord Long in 1920 invited Sir George Arthur to read a secret or unpublished report on the sinking of the "Hampshire" on the understanding that he would not divulge a word of it to anybody, and that under such conditions Sir George Arthur declined to accept Lord Long's invitation; whether the secret report referred to is now in the possession of the Admiralty; and whether there is any objection from the point of view of public interest to its publication?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I will, with the hon. Members' permission, answer these questions together.

As has been previously stated on many occasions in answer to similar questions in this House, there are valid objections to the publication of the reports of Naval Courts of Inquiry, which is the nature of the document in question. That the then First Lord offered in 1920 to show the report in confidence to Lord Kitchener's former secretary is, I believe, a fact, but it does not detract from the importance attached to the inviolability of such reports.

Sir R. HAMILTON

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answer he has

were in any way influenced by the closing of the dockyards at Rosyth and Pembroke, and whether any men are being given offers of employment at these other places?

Mr. DAVIDSON

I should require notice of that.

Following are the figures promised:

given is directly contradictory to one which was given last week, in which it was said the Admiralty had published all the information at their disposal? Having regard to what the right hon. Gentleman has now said, will he further consider the publication of the information at their disposal?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

With regard to the publication of the report of the court of inquiry, I do not think I can do better than refer the hon. Gentleman to the OFFICIAL REPORT of 1st April, 1919, when Mr. Bottomley asked a similar question and it was answered by Dr. Macnamara, who was then Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty. I cannot improve upon the answer he gave as to the reasons for not publishing the report of the court of inquiry. With regard to the question of any discrepancy between this answer and one given previously, I am unable to see that there can be any. What was said before was that the information at our disposal, which arose partly from the report of the court of inquiry, had been given to the public. It was never stated that the evidence or the full report had been published.

Sir R. HAMILTON

Is not the evidence part of the information at the disposal of the Admiralty?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I have given the information at our disposal, but we did not publish the report of the court of inquiry.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR

Is it not the case, as stated explicitly by the writer of the articles that are causing these questions, that he has been approached in the House of Commons by an emissary of the Government, making the same offer of showing the document, but under the strict condition that he would not make it public, and that he has stated that he will certainly make public everything that he knows?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

Well, Sir, I should be very sorry to be responsible for what the writer of those articles has stated, but I am not aware that he even said he had been offered that opportunity.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR

I will be able to show it to you.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I rather think the hon. Gentleman is confusing him with Sir George Arthur, who is quoted in the article in question, and who is the person referred to in this answer. I have not had any application from anybody to look at the report.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR

It is not a question of an application by the writer of the article. I am asking, is it not the case that an emissary of the Government approached the writer of the articles offering to show this document on the strict condition that publication would not be made?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

Well, he certainly never had my permission to do so. If anybody did it, I never heard of it before, and I certainly should not have given my permission.