§ 45. Sir SAMUEL HOAREasked the Prime Minister whether he will institute an inquiry into the means by which a daily newspaper has been able to forecast in detail the contents of the report of the inquiry into the R 101 disaster?
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald)For some days I have heard various rumours regarding the alleged contents of this report. I am informed, however, that the Court of Inquiry has not made its report to the Air Ministry. Such anticipations, therefore, can only be guess-work, and for this reason I am unable to say whether the newspaper in question has been able to forecast the contents of the report in detail or otherwise. Under the circumstances of this case an inquiry is quite certain to yield no useful results.
§ Sir S. HOAREArising out of that answer, has the Prime Minsiter himself read this report in the daily paper, and, if so, does he agree that the details are so circumstantial as to make it appear most probable that the writer of the report in the paper must have had the report of the Committee in his hands; and, in view of that fact, will he not follow the precedent which has often been followed by other Governments, and put the matter into the hands of the Law Officers of the Crown, to see how it is that a paper of this kind obtained that information?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI will be perfectly candid with the House. I am in this position. I have heard, not as Prime Minister or as a Minister of the Crown, even more details alleged to be in this report than were published in that paper on that day—and, in these circumstances, it is quite impossible to narrow down the charge or the terms of reference of the question and refer it to the Law Officers of the Crown in such a way that leakage can be proved. The alleged contents or the anticipated contents of this report had been a matter of conversation for days and days before anything at all appeared in this newspaper.
§ Sir S. HOAREArising out of that answer, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the paper in question states quite categorically that it has been able to reveal what the Court of Inquiry into the R.101 disaster will report, and it then gives a series of details which could not have been in possession of that paper unless they had seen the report; and, in view of that, will the Prime Minister not still make such an inquiry as I have suggested in the interests of hon. Members in all parts of this House.
§ The PRIME MINISTERI should very much like to get a really good case of leakage. This sort of thing is happening far too frequently, but I do not select this case, because I think it is one of the worst cases that could be selected for a really effective inquiry.
§ Sir K. WOODThe Prime Minister has just said that it is impossible to narrow down the inquiry. Is it not a fact that, although a report has not been presented, it has been set up in print, and therefore the right hon. Gentleman has ample opportunities of making pertinent inquiries in that particular direction?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAll I say is this. You want something a little more definite than that a report has been sent to the printers. That kind of inquiry, I am perfectly certain, in view of the rights of newspapers, would not reveal the source of information, and that kind of inquiry is bound to end in an abortive conclusion.
§ Sir S. HOAREWill the Prime Minister undertake to hold an inquiry if, when the report comes out in a fort- 2137 night's time, it shows quite clearly that the paper had the details of the report in its hands?
§ The PRIME MINISTERIf the right hon. Gentleman will wait until the report is out and not put his question in hypothetical form, I shall be glad to give him an answer.