§ 51. Mr. ELLIS SMITHasked the Prime Minister whether the evidence given by Sir Maurice Hankey to the Royal Com- 383 Mission on the Private Manufacture of Arms was given on his own behalf or, if not, on behalf of what Government Department?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs Sir Maurice Hankey stated quite plainly before the Royal Commission, he was speaking in his personal capacity, but in preparing his evidence he had been continuously in contact with the Government Departments principally concerned, namely, the Admiralty, War Office, Air Ministry, Foreign Office, Board of Trade and Treasury, and his evidence may be taken very broadly as representing the views of the officials of these Departments.
§ Mr. DALTONCan the Prime Minister tell us whether Sir Maurice Hankey volunteered to give this evidence, or whether he was invited to do so by his political chief?
§ The PRIME MINISTERHe was certainly not invited by his political chief. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a question down. My impression is that he was asked by the Commission, but I should not like to have that taken as a certainty.
§ Mr. DALTONWould the Prime Minister give us an assurance that any other public servants holding important positions in any of the Departments of State which he has enumerated, whose opinions may be contrary to those of Sir Maurice Hankey, will have an equal opportunity of giving evidence before this Commission?
§ The PRIME MINISTERSurely that is for the Commission to decide. I would like to say, as these observations have been made, that no inquiry of any kind on this subject could be considered complete until the unique experience of Sir Maurice Hankey had been considered.
§ Mr. DALTONI am only anxious to bring out the point, which I think the Prime Minister will admit, that it is open, I assume, to other public servants of prominence in any of the Departments he has mentioned, whose views may differ from those of Sir Maurice Hankey, equally to come forward and give their evidence.
§ The PRIME MINISTERIt is entirely within the competence of the Commission. I have not looked into this question, but in my view it is entirely within the competence of the Commission to call whatever evidence that they think fit.
§ Mr. ATTLEEIs it usual for an eminent civil servant to volunteer evidence before a Commission? Was it not, in this instance, a case of volunteering; and, if so, would other public servants who hold different views be able also to volunteer to give evidence in which they rely on the facts coming to them in their official capacity?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have had no notice of these questions. I do not know whether he was or was not asked. If some hon. or right hon. Gentleman will put down a specific question, I can tell the House exactly how it was that he came to give evidence.
§ Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIRWhy was a departure made in this instance from the usual practice, that on an important question of policy the views of officials of Departments are represented by responsible Ministers rather than by a civil servant, however distinguished?
§ The PRIME MINISTERPerhaps the right hon. Baronet will put that question down.