HC Deb 19 April 1948 vol 449 cc1434-5
65. Mr. Harold Davies

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any further statement to make on the authenticity of the document known as Protocol "M."

66. Captain Field

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether further to the examination made of the "M" Plan, any arrests have been made of the persons named in the document; whether they have been brought to trial; and with what results.

67. Mr. Platts-Mills

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any statement to make as to the genuineness of the document known as Protocol "M"

72. Mr. Fernyhough

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has now any further statement to make to the House with regard to Protocol "M."

Mr. McNeil

Protocol "M" was first published on 14th January, 1948, by the German Press in Berlin who had obtained copies of this document by the ordinary methods of news gathering, and its publication was undertaken quite freely and without any instigation by us or, as far as we know, by any other Government. The British authorities in Berlin had had at that time a copy in their hands for several days, but we had been making ordinary inquiries to test the reliability of this document before taking any steps.

Following publication, and in response to Questions in the House, I said, on behalf of my right hon. Friend, that having made such inquiries as were possible, we had no reason to believe otherwise than that the document was authentic. However, my right hon. Friend decided that the most careful and exhaustive investigations into the antecedents of the document should be undertaken. These eventually led us to a German not employed by His Majesty's Government who, after questioning, volunteered that he was the author of the document. I have read a summary of his statements and I must tell the House that they are not convincing and that they are in parts conflicting.

My right hon. Friend, however, wishes it made plain that after these further investigations we can only conclude that the authenticity of the document now lies in doubt. Two points, however, should be made. There have been developments in Germany which correspond to statements included in the document, and there are strong indications that even if the document is not itself authentic, it has been compiled from authoritative Communist sources, and this is corroborated by information already in our possession.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Before my right hon. Friend assures the House in future that such documents are genuine, will he consult his right hon. Friend about the Zinoviev letter, the forged "Pravda" and similar forgeries? Will he tell us why it was necessary to have the disclosure of this document as a forgery brought to our notice by a New York newspaper?

Mr. McNeil

I fiercely resent the imputations which have been made—

Mr. Hughes

The right hon. Gentleman did so before.

Mr. McNeil

I am probably likely to do so again if they are made in similar terms. The investigations by my right hon. Friend were initiated and carried through weeks before any newspaper report was available in New York or elsewhere.