§ 24. Mr. KELLYasked the President of the Board of Trade at what period one of the two senior accountants now Employed in the clearing office for enemy debts was director of the Repatriation Department of the Australian Imperial Force?
§ Mr. H. WILLIAMSI regret that the answer given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Member on the 26th June, by a clerical error, gave the previous Employer of the officer in question and not the post held by him. His rank in the office of the director of the Repatriation Department of the Australian Imperial Force was that of Staff Captain.
§ Mr. KELLYHave any further investigations taken place in regard to the conduct of this Department?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSThat point does not arise out of the question on the Paper.
§ 25. Mr. KELLYasked the President of the Board of Trade what are the grounds for the dismissal of the officer who recently submitted a memorandum complaining of the administration of the enemy debts office; and why the Department has refused to give him the reasons for such dismissal?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSThe officer in question was Employed on a temporary basis, and in common with other temporary officers he was appointed subject to the condition that his employment could be terminated by one week's notice on the part of the officer and by one month's notice on the part of the Department, given at any time without cause assigned. The procedure followed by the Department in terminating the appointment of this officer was in accordance with the condition stated above.
§ Mr. KELLYIs it yet in the mind of the Department to give this man the reasons for his dismissal, particularly as he presented a memorandum to the President of the Board of Trade, complaining of the conduct of his superior officer?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSThat seems to raise a separate question, which was dealt with by my right hon. Friend last week.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYDoes the hon. Member not think that it is rather unfortunate that an officer of his Department who prefers a complaint in the regular manner should be dismissed?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSOn Thursday of last week, my right hon. Friend suggested that, if the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Kelly) wished to raise this question further, he might raise it in the form of a specific allegation, which could be tested.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIs the hon. Member not aware that this is a specific allegation? I heard what was said last Thursday, and I make the allegation now. I say that an officer made a complaint and that he was dismissed for it, which I say is improper.
§ Captain GARRO-JONESHas the hon. Member looked into this question sufficiently to assure the House that the fact that this official submitted a memorandum formed no part of the reason for his dismissal?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSI am sorry that the case of this officer's dismissal has been brought into question, because personally I have no doubt that undue consideration has been given to him.
§ Captain GARRO-JONESCan the hon. Member answer my question? Has he satisfied himself that the fact that this man submitted a memorandum was no part of the reason for his dismissal?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSI have no reason for satisfying myself on that point.
§ Mr. KELLYIn view of the dissatisfaction and the doubt there is in the case, will this matter be further investigated?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSI do not know that there is any doubt, and I am not aware that there is any dissatisfaction; but, if the hon. Member desires anything to be investigated, will he kindly say what it is that he desires to be investigated?
§ Mr. KELLYIs it not a fact that a memorandum was presented to the Department containing charges of a serious nature, and are not those charges which ought to be investigated?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat question has been asked several times.
§ 26. Mr. KELLYasked the President of the Board of Trade whether application, on the ground of statelessness, for the release of sequestrated property are dealt with by the Enemy Debts Department on the basis of the applicant's legal claim to statelessness; how many such cases have been dealt with by compromise between the Department and Mr. Samuel Cromer, acting as agent for the applicant; and what is the total sum involved in such compromise releases?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In 19 cases where applications have been made to the Department for the Administration of German Property for release of property on the ground of statelessness the cases, after full consideration of the legal position and with the approval of the Board of Trade, have been dealt with by way of compromise with Mr. Samuel Cromer, acting as agent for the applicant. The total sum involved is approximately £880,636.
§ Mr. KELLYSeeing that these cases have to be decided upon the question 963 whether a man is a citizen of a particular State, can the hon. Member say how they can compromise as to a man being a member of the State or not? How is it possible to compromise as to citizenship of an enemy State, or not?
§ Mr. WILLIAMSI imagine that the compromise related to amounts.
§ Mr. KELLYIs it not a fact that these questions are decided on the citizenship of a particular State, apart from the amount? Is it possible to compromise as to whether a man is a citizen of Germany or not?
§ Mr. SPEAKERAny further questions must be put on the Paper.