§ 42 and 46. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister (1) whether he has seen the extracts from Cabinet minutes and documents appearing in The Times which relate to Middle East affairs during the period when Sir Anthony Eden was Prime Minister; and for what reason permission was given for their publication, in view of the general rule prohibiting this;
(2) to which Minister Sir Anthony Eden applied for permission to publish extracts from official documents relating to Middle East affairs during the period when he was Prime Minister.
§ The Prime MinisterI have not recognised, in the serialised extracts from Sir Anthony Eden's book, direct quotations from Cabinet minutes or Cabinet memoranda relating to Middle East affairs during the period when he was Prime Minister. There are general references to the subject matter of Cabinet discussions and there are extracts from other official documents 572 relating to Middle East affairs during this period. Sir Anthony Eden submitted the text of his book to me, through the Secretary of the Cabinet. I did not regard the publication of these references and extracts as open to objection.
§ Mr. ShinwellWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether Sir Anthony Eden undertook the examination of minutes and Cabinet documents himself personally or whether there was someone operating on his behalf? If the latter, was it not highly improper that anybody outside Government circles or not associated with previous Governments should be permitted to do so?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the usual practice has been followed in this as in other matters. I think that it will be found that I have followed exactly the precedent established by my predecessors in regard to other such writings. I want to make it clear, in case there is any misunderstanding, that the only actual quotations from the Cabinet memoranda, for which, of course, approval has to be given by the Queen, were on a matter when Sir Anthony Eden was Foreign Secretary, dealing with Far Eastern affairs.
§ Mr. ShinwellIf the right hon. Gentleman has perused the book—if he has not seen from the extracts in The Times—will he not agree that it is true that references are made to telegrams which passed between the United States State Department and the Foreign Office? If those telegrams were available to Sir Anthony Eden they would obviously have been extracted from Cabinet documents. Is not that so?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have always had a procedure by which a Minister of a past Administration has been able to consult the files and it has been done normally through the Cabinet Secretary. I think that it will be found that exactly the same precedent was followed by Lord Attlee in relation to the series of volumes published by my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill).
§ Mr. GaitskellWhile recognising that this is not an entirely simple and straightforward matter, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that 573 many of us feel that the way in which these conventions have been administered recently has become increasingly lax and that we would not accept the parallel with the memoirs of the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) as being something which should always be followed? There was something special about that particular case. Is it not unsatisfactory if, for instance, references are made to Cabinet decisions, as is the case with these memoirs, and to telegrams sent to the United States which, apart from what may be the indiscretion involved, also give a decidedly one-sided picture of the whole affair?
§ The Prime MinisterWhat the right hon. Gentleman is saying is something which I am bound to say has occurred to me. Perhaps we ought to treat the war and immediate post-war as something different. It would be a novel procedure, but it was that kind of thing I had in mind when I said that we ought perhaps to consider establishing new conventions for what one might call different times. I have just followed the ordinary conventions up to now, but I would be willing to consider whether we could try and think of a new structure and interpretation—it is not easy to define in words—and if I were able to do so I would certainly consult with the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. HealeyWould the Prime Minister consider at least publishing the names of the members of the Cabinet referred to by Sir Anthony Eden under the general description of "weak sisters", so as to remove the cloud of suspicion which must otherwise rest on the whole of his Government?
§ Mr. ShinwellWould the Prime Minister be good enough to answer my supplementary question, because I think it raises a matter of some importance, namely, did Sir Anthony Eden undertake the task of examining these telegrams that passed between the State Department and the Foreign Office and any other documents appertaining to Government business himself personally or was it undertaken by somebody outside? If the latter, was it not highly improper that somebody outside should have had access to Government documents?
§ The Prime MinisterI should not like to answer that precise question without notice. It is a matter which I could not answer straight out. I have no doubt that Sir Anthony Eden may have had some assistants to help him, but I will write to him and find out in detail the exact procedure by which he was able to recall the particular document which he wished to use. There is a difference between ex-Ministers having a look at documents and what is published. It has always been a tradition. But when there is a question of publication, what is laid down is that a person must receive not only the authority of the Prime Minister but the Queen's authority, advised by him. There are only two such instances that I can find, relating to the period when Sir Anthony Eden was Foreign Secretary. The general reading of old papers and so forth is another question. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will allow me to find out the exact facts, because it is a thing on which it is important to be precise.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerSince Sir Anthony Eden constantly uses the pronoun "we" and the Prime Minister was closely associated with him in the conduct of affairs at that time, is it not desirable for the Prime Minister to make clear whether he agrees with Sir Anthony's extraordinary account of them?
§ The Prime MinisterI share, and I am glad to share, the full responsibility I took at that time with a leader for whom I feel the deepest sense of loyalty and respect.