§ 30 and 31. Sir L. Plummerasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) to what persons outside Government service he authorised the communication on 18th September of any measures to be taken by him on 19th September;
(2) if he will state the names of Members of both Houses of Parliament, or ex-Members, other than members of the Government, who were seen on any official business connected with the Treasury or briefed by him or his representatives on Wednesday, 18th September.
§ Mr. P. ThorneycroftNo, Sir. I am glad to have this opportunity of saying that there was no leakage of the increase in the Bank Rate, that there was no brief about the Bank Rate, and it would I consider be quite inappropriate for me to 766 state whom I saw or for what purpose on this or any other day.
§ Sir L. PlummerDoes the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the last part of his Answer will cause a good deal of concern and dismay, particularly in the City of London, where grave doubts are being expressed about the propriety of the way in which the Bank Rate change was announced? Will he now make a further specific and categorical statement as to whether or not prior information of his intentions was given to an ex-Member of this House, namely, Mr. Oliver Poole?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftPrior information about the Bank Rate was given to no one who was not inside my Department or my own advisers. Prior information of that kind was not given. May I say this to the hon. Gentleman? If he had information which he thought raised any suspicion, he should have made it available to the Lord Chancellor and should not bandy it about here.
Mr. H. WilsonDoes not the Chancellor's refusal to answer this Question in the way it is put throw the most surprising light—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—the strangest light on the Prime Minister's refusal to order an inquiry? Will the right hon. Gentleman now tell the House: did he or any representative of the Treasury see Mr. Oliver Poole on Wednesday, 18th September?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftIf the right hon. Gentleman will reflect a moment—[HON. MEMBERS "Answer the question."] This is a serious matter—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] If the right hon. Gentleman will reflect a moment, he will realise how inappropriate that question really is, because if I were to state that in those days of pressure upon sterling, the T.U.C. had been seen—or the Chairman of the Conservative Party or even a right hon. Gentleman on the bench opposite—there is no doubt whatever that it would be used in some quarters to suggest that someone in that position had used for his own purposes some information which he had got, and for my own part I do not propose to pander to gossip of that kind.
Mr. WilsonWill the Chancellor now answer the question? Since he saw me a week before Bank Rate went up, before the decision was taken, we are asking him whether he saw anybody the afternoon after the Bank Rate decision 767 was taken and before it was known to the public generally? Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House of the inquiries he has made about the sales of gilt-edged, and whether any of them were undertaken by companies connected with any of the people whom he saw, or any other representative of the Treasury saw, on Wednesday afternoon?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftThis matter was fully dealt with in the letter which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister sent to the Leader of the Opposition. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] I have nothing whatever to add.
Mr. WilsonBut, Mr. Speaker, since the right hon. Gentleman said it was fully dealt with, is he aware that that letter dealt with only one or two specific and very minor pieces of evidence which we put before the Prime Minister—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—which it was our duty to put before the Prime Minister, because we had it? We had no idea at that time that there was any suggestion that the right hon. Gentleman had seen the Vice-Chairman of the Conservative Party. Will he not now, in order to allay public anxiety on this matter, state clearly whether he did or did not, or any other Treasury representative did or did not, see the Vice-Chairman of the Conservative Party, who has vast City interests, the day before Bank Rate went up?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftThe letter dealt with every scrap of evidence which the right hon. Gentleman put forward.
§ Sir R. JenningsWill the Chancellor appreciate that masses of people in this country will agree with his view not to be drawn into a mare's nest by opening any inquiry?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. If this matter is to be pursued, it should be pursued at another time. Otherwise it will take up too much of valuable Question Time.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsMay I repeat the question to the Chancellor, Mr. Speaker? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] In the circumstances, may I ask the Chancellor whether he will now say, did he or did he not see Mr. Oliver Poole on this date?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftI have already given a full answer to this. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."]
Mr. WilsonMr. Speaker, since the right hon. Gentleman said that the Lord Chancellor dealt with every piece of evidence submitted to him—and of course, we are all prepared to accept that fact—is he aware that this question about Mr. Oliver Poole was not submitted to the Lord Chancellor? Will he now recommend to his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—because it has only come up now and because we gave all the evidence we had to the Lord Chancellor—the need for a full inquiry, on oath, on all the circumstances arising out of this unfortunate matter?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftIf the right hon. Gentleman has any evidence at all which he thinks discloses any impropriety, it was his duty at the time to place it before the Lord Chancellor, and I may say that it is his duty now.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Jay.
§ Mr. JayBut could not the Chancellor clear up the whole of this matter—[Interruption.] Could he not clear up the whole of this matter—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I called the right hon. Gentleman because I wanted him to ask Question 32, but he is entitled to say what he likes.
§ Mr. JayI was about to ask the Chancellor if he could not clear up the whole matter to the satisfaction of both sides of the House by denying that he saw Mr. Oliver Poole on that day.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Jay. Question 32.
§ Sir P. Agnewrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerQuestion 32.
§ Sir P. AgnewWith great respect, Mr. Speaker, I did not understand whether you had called Question 32. If you had not, I was going to submit, with the greatest respect, that in view of the interests of hon. Members who have a great many Questions down on the Paper—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I have called Question 32.