§ Mr. Moelwyn HughesMay I ask for your guidance, Mr. Speaker, concerning a Private Notice Question? Many of us heard with considerable concern a series 1794 of grave allegations made in this House yesterday by the hon. Member for Mossley (Mr. A. Hopkinson). I thought it was right that the matter should be forthwith brought to the attention of the Prime Minister and that those allegations should be promptly investigated. I sought your permission to put down a Private Notice Question on this topic addressed to the right hon. Gentleman. You, in the exercise of your discretion, did not accept the Question, and all I ask, Mr. Speaker, is that for the guidance of myself and other hon. Members the House may be told the grounds upon which the Question was refused.
§ Mr. SpeakerApart from the fact that I did not consider it was a matter of extreme urgency, in any case a Private Notice Question is not the proper procedure. In such a case the proper procedure would be for the hon. and learned Member to put on the Paper a Motion asking for an inquiry or a Select Committee to be set up and then, when that is on the Order Paper, and when we reassemble, to ask the Secretary of State for Air what action he proposes to take on that Motion.
§ Mr. A. BevanWe have had on recent occasions a number of Private Notice Questions which have been put for the convenience of the Government which many of us thought were straining the rules of procedure. Here we have a Private Notice Question relating to a matter which occurred yesterday. It is true that hon. Members can put a Motion on the Order Paper, but everybody knows that is one of the most useless proceedings in the House, because towards the end of a Session the Order Paper contains about 100 Motions which hon Members have put down and which the Government, in their wisdom, usually disregard. Here there are very serious allegations made against the administration of one of the Service Departments which are going to be left to seethe, as it were, right over the Christmas Recess without any indication from the Government that they are going to make inquiries into the allegations. It seemed to us that this was a matter on which a Private Notice Question ought to be permitted.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member may think so, but I do not think so. As a matter of fact, if a Motion is put on the Order Paper and it is brought to the notice 1795 of the Secretary of State for Air he will have time to consider whether or not a Select Committee should be set up to inquire into this matter. He, after all, should have some little time for reflection. Hasty action might prejudice inquiring into the allegations, and therefore the due notice I have suggested is the proper way.
§ Mr. HopkinsonAlthough no notice was given to me of the point to be raised to-day——
§ Mr. HughesIf I may interrupt the hon. Member, I could not give him notice because I looked for him without avail in this building before I came in to my seat.
§ Mr. HopkinsonQuite right; I was not complaining in any way, because I came in rather late to-day. But the point is this: Suppose a Motion were put on the Order Paper. Already I have demanded, weeks ago, an inquiry, which was not granted by the Secretary of State, who was present then. He did not either assent to or refuse my demand for a full and impartial inquiry into the whole affairs of that Group Training Command of R.A.F. from its inception. It seems to me that the Secretary of State has had ample time to consider the matter. If a Motion were put on the Order Paper now, would it be in Order, as the question has already been raised on my Question and is still pending on my own application for a full and impartial judicial inquiry?
§ Mr. SpeakerPerhaps after what the hon. Member has said to the House, the Air Ministry may change its mind. After all, I understand, the hon. Member made many allegations at some length before the House.
§ Earl WintertonOn a point of Procedure, and for the information of the House, is it not a fact that if such a Select Committee were appointed, that is to say, if the Motion was accepted by the Government, the Select Committee would have power to compel not only Members of this House but outside persons to give evidence, and therefore the true facts of the case would be disclosed under oath, which is what some of us wish to see?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is so, if the House so chooses.
§ Mr. GallacherFurther to that point of Order. You will be aware, Sir, that all the papers this morning carry a story about these allegations. Is it not a matter of urgency that this House should immediately take a decision, even if only in the form of question and answer, in order to direct the attention of the Minister to the fact that he must immediately answer these allegations, as they are in the hands of everybody in this country?
§ Sir Ralph GlynIs it not very undesirable that public servants should have allegations made against them in this sort of way when they are quite unable to reply? Is it not the duty of Members of this House, if they wish to bring accusations, to take the quickest procedure possible in order that they may be cleared up? I do not believe any of us want to see any public servants or civil servants subjected to the treatment recently meted out to them, not only here but in another place. I feel that this is a great change in ordinary procedure and something new, of which the House should take immediate cognisance. That would be only fair to the Government, to the Government Departments and civil servants.
§ Mr. SpeakerQuite obviously the quickest procedure is for the House, if it wishes, to set up a Select Committee, but that must be a matter for consideration and it cannot be decided in answer to a Private Notice Question. Surely a few hours' notice should be given, and I suggested that if a Motion were put on the Order Paper the Government would have time to consider it and the House, when it comes back after Christmas, would have full time to insist upon a Select Committee, if it wished.
§ Mr. A. HopkinsonWith your permission, Sir, I wish to point out again that I made a specific demand in Debate in this House for the setting up of a judicial committee, to inquire into this matter. That offer still remains open, and surely the authorities concerned have had time enough to consider the request, and either give a definite refusal to set up such an investigation, or accede to my demand and let us have a full and impartial judicial inquiry.
§ Sir Irving AlberyI should like to ask whether, when a civil servant or public official is assailed in this way, it is not, 1797 obviously, the first duty of the Government to defend that official? In the conditions in which the Debate took place last night, that does not seem to have been adequately possible, and it also appears to me that this House would hardly be in a position to decide whether a Select Committee were necessary until it had heard the Government's defence against the accusations which were made last night. Therefore, it seems to me that, if it be possible, it is the duty of the Government now to seek an opportunity to defend their servants.
§ Mr. SpeakerI rather thought that the course I had suggested would cause that to take place. It would bring the matter to the attention of the Air Ministry, who would naturally take steps to defend their servants, or take what other action they thought fit.
§ The Prime MinisterThis matter will receive, as it has already received, the direct attention of His Majesty's Government, and when we re-assemble a precise statement will be made to the House.