HC Deb 10 May 1926 vol 195 cc686-8
Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN - DOYLE

(by Private Notice) asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the following statements made in this House on Thursday last by the hon. Member for Newcastle East (Mr. Connolly): That the O. M. S. had broken down at Newcastle; that the trade unions had been requested to take over the essential services and had done so on condition that soldiers and special constables be withdrawn; that this condition was agreed to, and that the trade onions were now carrying on satisfactorily"; whether there was or is any foundation for these statements; what was the exact position in Newcastle on Thursday last, and what is the position according to the latest information?

Sir H. BARNSTON

There is no foundation for any of these statements. The organisation in Newcastle has worked quite satisfactorily. It was working well on the day referred to, and is working still better to-day.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Is it not a fact that the Commissioners, the Under-Secretary for Health and General Montgomery were in conference on Wednesday and Thursday with the Strike Committee; that the meeting on Thursday lasted two and a half hours; that the Minister offered the Strike Committee a system of dual control, which was refused; and further, has the hon. Gentleman's notice been drawn to the following statement issued by the Newcastle Trade Council: If proof is needed for this statement we can get it from Sir Kingsley Wood. Yesterday he made an appeal to the trade unions for help. He admitted that he had lost control of the situation— [Interruption.] Hon. Members opposite had better wait till I have finished. They will get all the opportunity they want— and asked the Transport Union to cooperate in maintaining supplies. The position was so desperate"— I am now reading his own words in inverted commas— that provided the unions would come to his help he was prepared to ask the Government to withdraw the troops and marines. This the unions refused. If this information that we are in possession of is not correct, what steps does the hon. Gentleman intend to take with those who are repeating them in the House and outside, including myself?

Sir H. BARNSTON

I am informed that all those statements are absolutely untrue, and I am a little bit surprised that the hon. Member is not ashamed to repeat them.

Mr. CONNOLLY

I ask your protection, Mr. Speaker. Am I liable to this sort of thing?

Mr. SPEAKER

As the two statements differ fundamentally, all we can do is to hear both sides.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Is the hon. Gentleman within his rights in telling me I ought to be ashamed of speaking what I know to be the truth? Is he aware that it was stated in this House on Thursday that there was no foundation whatever—

Mr. SPEAKER

rose—

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE

In view of the attitude taken up by the hon. Member and those who support him on this important question, I ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, in order to raise a definite matter of urgent public importance.

Mr. SPEAKER

I have first some other questions to dispose of.

Mr. BASIL PETO

If such statements as that just made from the Opposition Benches were made outside the House, would it not be immaterial whether they were true or untrue? Would they not involve the arrest and imprisonment of the person making them under the Defence of the Realm Acts?