§ 30. Mr. McGovernasked the Home Secretary what form of inquiry has been held in place of the Advisory Committee appeal into the case of Mr. Cahir Healy, M.P.; and whether he has decided to hold Mr. Healy for the full period of the war or release him forthwith?
§ Mr. PeakeMr. Healy, like any other person detained under the Regulation, has the right to make objections to the Advisory Committee, but he has not availed himself of it. He has, however, been given the information upon which my right hon. Friend decided to make the Order for his detention, and Mr. Healy wrote a letter in reply. My right hon. Friend thought it right to give Mr. Healy an opportunity of explaining more fully his statements in this letter, and asked the chairman of one of the panels of the Advisory Committee to see him on his behalf, and he has had a full report of the interview. Having considered all the circumstances of the case, he has decided that Mr. Healy must continue to be detained, though I cannot say for what period his detention may prove to be necessary.
§ Mr. McGovernAs Mr. Healy claims that his only interest was to work for a united Ireland, and that he had no intention of taking any action detrimental to the interests of this country, why should he be detained? As the Home Secretary, against the advice received from the Government of Northern Ireland, personally ordered his detention, is it not up to the Home Secretary to see that every avenue is explored in order to give this man a proper and fair deal?
§ Mr. PeakeI cannot, of course, enter into the merits of Mr. Healy's case; but the Home Secretary has gone beyond what is legally necessary in sending down to Brixton the chairman of one of the 2137 panels of the Advisory Committee to interview Mr. Healy and to give him a statement of the reasons why he was detained. I do not think the Home Secretary can be expected to do more than to apply his mind to the case impartially, having received the report from the chairman, who interviewed Mr. Healy.
§ Mr. McGovernBut, as the question in connection with Mr. Healy is the narrow one contained in the letter, as to whether he intended to take any action during or following the war, is it not up to the Home Secretary to see that a case of this kind is publicly known, and that the individual is given a decent opportunity of defending himself, even though, as an Irishman, he objects to the ordinary Advisory Committee?
§ Mr. PeakeI do not know that he has put forward any demand for his case to be heard. He certainly has refused to accept the tribunal set up by this House for hearing objections against detention orders.
§ Mr. McGovernI beg to give notice that, owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the Reply, I will raise this question on the Adjournment. It is a public scandal.