HC Deb 19 September 1950 vol 478 cc1706-8
26. Major Tufton Beamish

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that one member of the Steel Board, of whom he has been informed, was for many years an active Communist agent; and whether he is satisfied that this individual satisfies the requirements of his security measures announced last year.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Attlee)

Yes, Sir. I am aware that this gentleman was at one time a member of the Communist Party. I am satisfied that he severed all connection with that party many years ago. The statement which I made in this House on 15th March, 1948, is not relevant to this case.

Major Beamish

As the Prime Minister does not apparently agree that a man who spent some 10 years between the wars as an active Communist is unlikely to inspire the British public with confidence, may I ask him the question from a different angle? In view of the fact that the Communist and Socialist Parties hold the same views about steel nationalisation, and in view of the electoral support which the Communists have given and will give to the Socialist Party—

Mr. Speaker

To make insinuations and implications is out of order.

Mr. John Hynd

Has the Prime Minister's attention been drawn to the fact that there has already been sabotage of the Steel Corporation, and will he make inquiries about which political party is doing it?

Mr. Peter Thorneycroft

Are we to understand that the Prime Minister accepts Mr. Stokes's statement that he left the Communist Party? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is one of the practices amongst European Communists to claim to have left the party, in order to infiltrate into other parties? In those circumstances, is not the right hon. Gentleman taking considerable risks in submitting a great and proud industry to the Government and control of Marxist riff-raff of this character?

The Prime Minister

I have checked up fully on these statements and I know that Mr. Stokes is a very active anti-Communist. I am also aware that his services were highly thought of by Ministers in the war Coalition Government—and not Ministers of my party.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

I think we had better get on.

Mr. Edelman

On a point of order. Did you not call me before, and did I not yield to the hon. Gentleman opposite?

Mr. Speaker

Whoever I called, I think it much wiser to get on now.

Mr. Nally

On a point of order. Reverting to Question No. 26, I wonder whether I might ask your guidance Sir on this particular Question. The Question as put down states that a certain individual, whose name has been given to the Prime Minister, was for many years an active Communist agent. As I understand it, there are in this House rules governing Questions whereby one is not entitled in putting down a Question to make an imputation against the character of the person about whom the Question is framed. You may perhaps recall in that connection that when certain Questions were raised about Fascist agents in connection with a list of members of an organisation—

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman seems to be making a speech on a point of order. All he really asked me was whether it is out of order to put on the Order Paper the word "Communist" because it is a word of abuse. We have had Communist Members of this House and there is no reason why that word should not go on to the Order Paper, and this Question is perfectly in order. To be quite frank, all the hon. Gentleman has done is to carry on a matter of heat which I was trying to close down.

Mr. S. Silverman

Further to that point of order. May I suggest, with respect, that your Ruling has rather misunderstood the purport of the point of order raised by my hon. Friend. I understand that you have ruled that to use the word "Communist" is not to attack anybody's character, and that it is therefore in order. That is not what was questioned. What is on the Order Paper is not merely the word "Communist" but the phrase "active Communist agent," and that phrase is used in a Question to the Prime Minister which must in the circumstances import an attack upon the gentleman's character, otherwise there would be no point in the Question at all. It was on that that my hon. Friend was asking for your Ruling.

Mr. Speaker

I cannot see that there is any point in that either. After all, the hon. Gentleman might have complained of some other board that a member should not be appointed because he was an active Conservative agent, or an active Liberal agent, or an active Labour agent. There is nothing in that at all. I must say that, although one may dislike the words, they are in order. Mr. Bossom.