HC Deb 13 February 1945 vol 408 cc31-5
52. Sir John Mellor

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give an assurance that the information to be furnished to the French Government, with regard to assets of French nationals, will not include particulars of individual accounts supplied to His Majesty's Government by bankers under compulsion of Trading with the Enemy legislation.

57 and 59. Mr. Pickthorn

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will particularise the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy legislation under which information relating to the assets of French nationals has been furnished to His Majesty's Government and which authorise the transmission of that information to the French Government;

(2) whether he consulted the Bank of England or the joint stock banks before reaching the definite conclusion that he would supply to the French Government information relating to the assets of French nationals furnished to His Majesty's Government under Trading with the Enemy legislation.

61. Mr. Petherick

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer under what section of what Act he proposes to give the French Government information regarding assets of French nationals held in the United Kingdom or British Colonies.

64. Captain Duncan

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his recent agreement with the French Finance Minister included the disclosure by both Governments to each other of the holdings of individuals of one country in the country of the other, or merely the global totals of francs and sterling so held.

Sir J. Anderson

With the permission of hon. Members I will answer Question 52 together with Nos. 57, 59, 61 and 64.

Mr. Pickthorn

On a point of Order. I have never quite understoood this preamble by Ministers asking the permission of hon. Members to answer several Questions together, and I should like to have your guidance, Sir. I submit that, on this occasion, these five Questions may, quite properly, be reduced to three, two pairs of them being roughly identical, but the attempt to answer more than that together, in one piece, really deprives hon. Members of part of their rights.

Mr. Speaker

I do not think there is anything in the point of Order. It is common custom and, after all, I note the names of those who have put down Questions and I always give them a chance of asking supplementaries. I think this is the best way as it saves giving the same kind of answer to similar Questions several times.

Sir J. Anderson

In proposing to answer the five Questions together, I had in mind that they all related to parts of a subject which, in my judgment, ought to be dealt with as a whole.

Under the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act, of the Trading with the Enemy (Custodian) Order, 1939, in particular Articles 1 to 5 of that Order, the property of persons resident in France has since 1940 been held subject to the terms of the Custodian of Enemy Property Order, all debts have been payable to him and all bank balances payable to his account. The practical arrangements made in the last-named instance are equivalent in law to actual payment of the balances to the Custodian's account. Similar circumstances affect British property in France, though British property there has been controlled by authorities set up under German influence and the exact position of the various types of property is not yet known. Negotiations are in progress to secure the release of both French and United Kingdom property from these controls and the arrangements will involve the reciprocal exchange of information regarding the holdings of individuals. This will be an exchange of information lawfully and properly in the hands of the Government. It is an executive act of the Government not requiring legislative authority, taken in the course of its relations with the Government of an Allied Power, for which I accept full responsibility. The circumstances are purely war-time circumstances and the action proposed has no bearing upon Government policy affecting the maintenance of private relations of confidentiality in peace-time.

Sir J. Mellor

Whatever may be the merits of these disclosures, are they not right outside the purpose for which Parliament granted powers to the Treasury to obtain this information?

Sir J. Anderson

I suppose that Parliament granted power to the authorities to obtain the information in order that the properties in question should be dealt with, in due course, in an orderly manner, and so as to safeguard the national interest. I am well aware of the importance that is attached to the confidential relations between a banker and his clients, and I am perfectly prepared to do everything in my power to preserve that principle. I am quite clear, however, that, in relation to an Allied State in the position of France at this moment, I could not possibly have considered withholding information which would be of value to that country in its endeavour to recover, as speedily as possible, from the consequences of German occupation, and which is in my possession by whatever means, without regard at all to the principles governing the relation between bankers and their clients.

Mr. Pickthorn

Does the last sentence of the answer mean that my right hon. Friend could not consider withholding similar facilities from the Governments of Belgium, Holland, Poland and Yugoslavia? Has there been any consultation with the United States and Swiss Governments?

Sir J. Anderson

The case of other Governments will be dealt with if and when it arises. On the question of consultation, I felt clear that this was a matter which should be dealt with on my responsibility, and I so dealt with it.

Mr. Petherick

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the reason he has given to-day is not the reason that he gave a short time ago when first announcing this proposal, and is he not going very far in stating that he parted with private information, gained apparently under an Act of Parliament, without consultation with this House and on executive action?

Sir J. Anderson

I am prepared to accept that challenge. The Regulation has the force of law and, as the result of the working of that Regulation, the Government are in possession of the information in question, which is of great interest and importance to the French Government. There is no provision in the law limiting the right of the Government to deal with such information as they think best in the general interest.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

Is not the object of this policy to segregate the finances of Britain and France, and, if so, is not that policy entirely misdirected?

Sir J. Anderson

I do not quite understand the implications of the question. The policy, as far as I am concerned, is to help the Government of France to deal with an extremely difficult question which it is in our interest should be dealt with as soon as possible.

Mr. Pickthorn

Has my right hon. Friend had a full search made of the Parliamentary Debates behind these powers, to make sure that there was no Ministerial assurance that the information should not be used for purposes other than those for which its gathering was authorised?

Sir J. Anderson

I should be very greatly surprised if a search revealed anything of the kind.

Mr. Pickthorn

That was not my question.

Sir J. Mellor

Are the United States Government taking similar action with the French Government?

Sir J. Anderson

I could not say. I am responsible for the actions of this Government.

Mr. Pickthorn

I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.