HC Deb 05 September 1940 vol 365 cc21-2
37. Sir Waldron Smithers

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has yet received a report on the serious allegations of waste and extravagance and other irregularities preferred by Major Evans, Major Reid Kellett, D.S.O., M.C., and Mr. W. H. E. Carr, in connection with War Office works; and can he now make any further statement on these allegations, and the further steps he proposes to take in order that these allegations may, in the public interest, be substantiated or refuted?

The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Richard Law)

The allegations by Major Reid Kellett and Mr. Carr were the subject of two special investigations conducted by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Bolton (Sir C. Entwistle) and the Treasury Solicitor respectively. As a result of these investigations, it was decided that there was no reason for any further inquiry. My hon. Friend may remember that, in a letter to the then Secretary of State, he himself concurred in this decision. I am sending him a copy of the letter in question. As regards the allegations by Major Evans, these have been carefully examined, and, as a result, I am satisfied that no prima facie case exists which would justify further inquiry. I have written to my hon. Friend, enclosing the results of these inquiries, and I am hopeful that, when he has perused them, he will concur in the view which I have just expressed.

Sir W. Smithers

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that since that letter was written I have been given to understand that no witnesses were allowed at the inquiry; and as these allegations are so serious, may I ask him to suggest to his right hon. Friend that a special inquiry should be held, at which these three gentlemen could be heard and could produce their witnesses?

Mr. Law

In the case of the inquiry held by the hon. and learned Member for Bolton (Sir C. Entwistle), it is, I think, true that these witnesses were not present, but my hon. Friend should not take it that the officer in question had not every opportunity of putting his case. I would point out that this inquiry was not one which invoked the whole machinery of the law. Its purpose was to discover whether or not it was necessary to invoke that machinery, and it was quite clear from the evidence that that was not necessary. With regard to the Treasury Solicitor's inquiry, all kinds of witnesses were examined at it and it is clear that every one of the charges was of a completely frivolous character.

Sir W. Smithers

In view of the most unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.