§ 62. Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGEasked the Home Secretary if he will state how many persons were found on the premises of Arcos when raided by the police on the 12th May, and what was their nationality?
§ 63. Captain FANSHAWEasked the Home Secretary how many persons found on the premises of Arcos, on Thursday, 12th May, were members of the Dismissed Police and Prison Officers' Association?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI am informed that there were approximately 250 persons, and that so far as is known none were members of the association referred to. I am not in a position to furnish particulars of their nationality.
§ Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGECan it be understood that the names and addresses of these people have been taken?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSYes.
§ Mr. TAYLORWere the persons concerned members of the staff of Arcos, or were there people there in the course of business who were not attached to the staff?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI think the only persons included in the answer to this question were those who were employed on the premises.
§ 59. Mr. SAKLATVALAasked the Home Secretary whether he authorised the raid on the offices of the Arcos Company in London on Thursday the 12th instant; and will he state the reasons for such action?
§ 64. Mr. ARTHUR HENDERSONasked the Home Secretary whether he is now able to give the House further information with regard to the police raid upon the premises of Arcos, Limited; whether the search warrant also authorised a raid upon the premises of the Russian trade department; and whether, in fact, these premises have been raided?
§ Mr. A. HENDERSON (by Private Notice)asked the Home Secretary if he is now in a position to give a reply to the questions submitted at the last sitting of the House with regard to the raid on the premises of Arcos, Limited?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI will answer these questions together.
The information which, as I have already informed the House, was sent to me on Wednesday evening last by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War, satisfied me that a certain official document was or had been improperly in the possession of a person employed in the premises occupied by Arcos, Limited, at 49, Moorgate. That document bore on its face a statement that it was the property of His Majesty's Government and was not to be circulated either directly or indirectly to the Press or to any person not holding an official position in His Majesty's Service; it was, in fact, a document of which unauthorised persons were known to be attempting to obtain copies. In view of that information I at once consulted with the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary, and with their knowledge and assent I authorised the police to apply for a warrant under the Official Secrets Acts to search the premises occupied by Arcos, Limited, at 49, Moorgate. The building bearing that address is shared by Arcos, Limited, and the Russian Trade Delegation, and there is free inter-communication throughout the building. The warrant accordingly authorised the search of the premises occupied by Arcos, Limited, and the 912 Trade Delegation, and the search was carried out in strict conformity with the warrant. I am informed that the search only came to an end at 12 o'clock last night. The document in question was not found, but the police have taken possession of certain papers which might bear upon the matter, and the examination of those papers is still proceeding.
§ Mr. HENDERSONMay I ask whether it is the right hon. Gentleman's intention to give a fuller statement at a later sitting of the House, and whether in the event of the Opposition desiring to debate that statement facilities will he afforded by the Government for the purpose?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe reply to the first part of the question is, certainly. I have seen some of the documents myself. They are still being examined, and in the course of two or three days I hope I shall be able to make a fuller statement to the House. If the right hon. Gentleman desires to question my conduct, or the conduct of the Government, the usual means are open to him, and I suppose that the Vote for my salary can be put down for any convenient day.
§ Mr. HENDERSONThe House must appreciate the fact that the issues raised by the raid that has been made are of such importance and so far-reaching that it is quite impossible for them to be discussed by way of question and answer, but the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion that the Vote for his salary should be put down does not meet the case, and unless I can get some satisfaction that the Government will afford time—the Government would not be affording time if it was a case of taking one of the Opposition Supply days—unless the Government will give an assurance that that time will be afforded, I think the Opposition will be entitled to ask for the Adjournment of the House.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAs far as that is concerned, I cannot dictate to the right hon. Gentleman what form the attack he proposes to make should take. I have suggested that if he wishes to attack me in issuing the authorisation the Vote for my salary should be put down. On the other hand, if it is of such importance that he thinks it desirable to 913 move a Vote of Censure on the Government as a whole, of course a day will be found for that purpose.
§ Mr. CLYNESPending any further discussion of the matter, can the Home Secretary say how the information is being supplied to the Press with regard to these private transactions of the Government? Is it being supplied by representatives of His Majesty's Government or by their agents?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSIt is quite impossible for anyone to say how it is being supplied. I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that my life was made a burden to me yesterday by the Press. If the right hon. Gentleman looks at certainly one newspaper that I saw this morning, he will find that I distinctly said, "I cannot, and will not, answer any more questions."
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEWhether documents are discovered or not, it is obviously a very grave matter, which may not be discussed in the form of a Vote of Censure, but obviously it ought to be discussed. May I ask the Home Secretary meanwhile when he expects to make a full statement to the House? When that statement is made obviously is the time to put a question to the Prime Minister as to the form which discussion should take. Whatever may be discovered or not discovered, it is a very grave matter indeed.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI think that I shall be in a position to make a full statement on Thursday, if that will meet the convenience of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. PONSONBYWould the right hon. Gentleman say whether this raid was timed by him to coincide with the Committee stage of the Trade Unions Bill?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is the kind of question that carries an insinuation.
§ Mr. R. HUDSONWill it be possible to discuss on Thursday the action of the Russian Chargéd 'Affaires in making representations to His Majesty's Opposition?
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI wish to put a question on quite a different 914 matter. With reference to the allegations that have been made about the searching of women by the police, of course, naturally, I accept the statement that no male police searched women, but were the police accompanied by women searchers, and, if not, how the right hon. Gentleman knows what documents were taken out by the female staff?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAs far as that is concerned, I made personal inquiries of the heads of police, both of the Metropolitan and City Police, who actually carried out the warrant, and they assured me that no woman was searched on the premises. All that happened was that their handbags were searched as they left the premises.
§ Lieut.- Commander KENWORTHYDoes the right hon. Gentleman not see that they could take out 100 documents?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe police are always courteous to women.
Commander LOCKER - LAMPSONWould the right hon. Gentleman say whether the theft of this secret document by members of Arcos is not a breach of the Trade Agreement?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThat is a matter for debate.
§ Mr. HARDIEThe Home Secretary in his statement said that before action was taken he consulted with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary. In the Press during the last two days there has been published a statement, as given by the Foreign Secretary in reply to a question, that he knew nothing about it. I hope the Home Secretary will see that that is contradictory. My next point is this. I want to ask now that the search is over, are the same powers that brought about the destruction in the search to be used to put the building into order?
§ Mr. WALLHEADOn a point of Order. I want to ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to whether it is in order for the hon. Member for Handsworth (Commander Locker-Lampson) to make the allegation that this document was stolen by the Soviet authorities?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is the very reason why I intervened. Supplementary questions carrying insinuations ought not to be put.
§ Mr. WALLHEADShould not the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Handsworth (Commander LockerLampson) be withdrawn?
§ Mr. LANSBURYI want to ask the Home Secretary a. definite question. Does he definitely state that the document that he has mentioned was stolen by someone connected with the Arcos Company?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI think it would be better to deal with that subject in debate. What I have said and what I repeat is that I am satisfied that this document was, or is, in the Arcos building. I was satisfied of that before I issued the warrant.
§ Mr. LANSBURYThe statement made by the hon. and gallant Member for Handsworth (Commander LockerLampson) was that it was stolen by the Arcos authorities. I simply want to ask the right hon. Gentleman, does he say that that statement is true?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI adhere to the statement I have made. I was satisfied before I authorised the warrant to be issued that this particular document certainly had been in the possession of Arcos.
§ Mr. THURTLEArising out of the last reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is prepared to give to the House proof of the statement he has just made, to the effect that he is satisfied that the document either was or is in the Areas building?
§ Major MacANDREWHave any steps been taken to deal with the person responsible for this document, which has apparently been stolen?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAt present I am not in a position to make a statement in regard to that. The question should be put to my right hon. Friend.
§ Sir W. DAVISONIs it the case that a large number of documents were in course of being burned when the police entered the building?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI think it would be perhaps better that I should defer answering the supplementary questions until Thursday, when I will make a full statement.
§ Mr. WALLHEADrose—
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think it would be better to defer the matter until Thursday.
§ Mr. LANSBURYGive them time to think!