§ 54. Mr. Wedgwood Bennasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he proposes to seek the assent of this House to the Czechoslovak loan; and whether there is any recent precedent for such pledging of public money on the private assurances of Ministers?
§ Sir J. SimonI am sorry that it has not been possible to introduce this legislation before Christmas as I had hoped. I propose to introduce it as soon as possible after the Recess. I cannot, of course, accept the implication contained in the second part of the question. The only assurance given by Ministers, which was immediately communicated to the House, was that legislation would be introduced.
§ Mr. BennDoes the right hon. Gentleman contend that the House has given its assent in any form to this legislation?
§ Sir J. SimonNo, Sir, I think the object of legislation being introduced is in order to get the assent of the House.
§ Mr. BennIn that case, why does the right hon. Gentleman boggle at the phrase "private assurances of Ministers"? Is there anything behind all this?
§ Sir J. SimonI understand a private assurance to be an assurance given in private. This was an assurance given here publicly.
§ Mr. BennIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that we have never received an assurance, and, furthermore, that we have no knowledge of how the money is being spent? Has he any such knowledge?
§ Sir J. SimonThose are two quite distinct questions. When the right hon. Gentleman says that he has no knowledge of the assurances given I would point out that it has been stated in the House what the assurance was, and that there has been no other assurance. As regards the way in which the money has been spent, I think a statement has already been 3085 made, and when we introduce legislation we shall certainly try to make that matter clear.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas MooreWas not a statement made in connection with the Prime Minister's policy after Munich?
§ Mr. BuchananWas not the money loaned out prior to these assurances and should not the right hon. Gentleman take steps to introduce legislation at once in order, from the Parliamentary and public point of view, that an assurance might be given that Parliament would have some say as to how the money was to be spent? What is now happening is that money is being spent without Parliament having given approval in the matter?
§ Sir J. SimonI think that I have told the House before that it was certainly hoped to introduce the legislation more promptly. I certainly should much prefer it. I have also stated that our difficulty was that we had had negotiations with the other countries concerned—I mentioned three countries—and that it has taken longer to arrange the question of the guarantee of the loan than we expected.
§ Mr. BuchananWill not all the money be spent by the time you introduce the Bill?
§ Mr. BennI apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for pressing him further, but I must point out that we are not talking about the £30,000,000, but about the £10,000,000. Nobody knows whether it is a grant or a loan, and nobody knows how it is being spent. Many people suspect that it is being spent under German direction. We should like some particulars from the Chancellor of the Exchequer who has authorised the expenditure.
§ Sir J. SimonNo one could be more anxious to remove this suspicion than I, and that is the reason why I want the legislation as soon as possible.
§ Mr. ManderIf the House does not pass the legislation, will not the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Government have to find the money from their own pockets?
§ Sir J. SimonI should have to throw myself on the House.