§ 46. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister what privileges are allowed to ex-Cabinet Ministers in the use and publication of documents and content of Cabinet discussions when no longer in office.
§ Mr. R. A. ButlerI have been asked to reply.
It is customary to allow former Ministers of the Crown access to Cabinet and other documents which they saw during their period of office. Like other persons who have held office under the Crown, they are under an obligation to obtain permission from the Government of the day for the disclosure of any unpublished information which they obtained by virtue of their official position. As a general rule, Cabinet documents, or extracts from them, may not be published.
§ Mr. ShinwellHas the right hon. Gentleman observed the memoirs to be published in the name of Sir Anthony Eden which appear to denigrate the United States Government, President Eisenhower, and the late Secretary of State, Mr. Dulles? Has he also observed that the memoirs indicate that we were not prepared for any defence, particularly in the sphere of landing craft and other equipment, at the time of the Suez affair? The memoirs also reflect on some of his colleagues in the last Government. In the interests of the public, 367 and in the interests of the Government, would it not be far better to make a clean breast of the whole Suez affair and make all the facts available to the public and not leave them in the hands of somebody who may be regarded as biassed or prejudiced? Will the right hon. Gentleman also answer this question? Is this privilege at the discretion of the ex-Prime Minister? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when I ventured to write something about my past some years ago, I was prohibited from commenting on many of the incidents which had occurred in the lifetime of the Labour Government. Are we to understand that if I again write my memoirs I will be permitted to disclose the facts in relation to various episodes?
§ Mr. ButlerThe first general observation I should like to make is that I think it would be fair to say that the treatment accorded to this book was similar to that which the Labour Government of the day gave to the books by my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) on the last war. That follows a general rule, adopted between Governments. The second point to which the right hon. Gentleman referred was that he was troubled by certain inhibitions under which he laboured or restrictions imposed upon himself. If he would care to approach me in my present capacity, or my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister when he returns, to see whether we can assist in any way, we shall be only too glad to do so. I would only say that his own colleagues will fear what he may release much more than we fear anything that has already been published by Sir Anthony Eden.
§ Mr. ShinwellWill the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to reply to the major part of my supplementary question, namely, why the Government do not make a clean breast of the whale Suez affair and lay the whole of the facts before the public? Regarding his advice to me, is it necessary that I should seek the discretion of the right hon. Gentleman? Ought not there to be a rule applicable to all ex-Cabinet Ministers and no privilege provided for one as against another?
§ Mr. ButlerI announced in my Answer the general rule which governs matters of this sort. In so far as the right hon. Gentleman can respond to this 368 rule, we shall be only too glad to consider any request he may make. With regard to his main point, whether we should make a clean breast of this affair, there have been endless debates on this subject in this House which have clearly revealed the policy and acts of Her Majesty's Government at that time. We are only too glad now to read Sir Anthony Eden's own account, which I should have thought was in enough detail to satisfy anybody.
§ Mr. WiggThe right hon. Gentleman will recall that the Government have steadfastly refused to allow a debate on General Keightley's despatches reporting on the Suez operation, and he will have noted that Sir Anthony Eden now states what same of us in this House constantly tried to bring to the attention of the public, namely, that there was a crippling shortage of landing craft at Suez, which was a disgraceful situation. But is it not even more disgraceful and demanding of inquiry that the situation, bad as it was then, is infinitely worse today?
§ Mr. ButlerI could not answer the whole of that supplementary question without notice: I should have to make a comparison between the two situations. I would only say that permission has been given for the publication of these memoirs and, so far as I can see, nothing irregular has been done.
§ Mr. GaitskellWhile recognising that the rule observed in this matter is the same as has applied for a considerable time, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that it is not very satisfactory when individual ex-Ministers select extracts from what has happened and choose their own way of doing it so that by no means the complete picture is made available and that it would be much more satisfactory—if the rule is to be administered as slackly as it has been in recent years—if the whole facts were made available and an official history of the Suez episode were published? Failing that, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would perhaps care to publish his own memoirs?
§ Mr. ButlerIn answer to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I should make clear what is obviously well known, that these are the memoirs of Sir Anthony Eden for 369 which the Government take no responsibility. They are the memoirs of a private person. That must be known to all, but I will now make it even clearer than it was before. Referring to the further observation of the right hon. Gentleman, having been an historian myself and having had something to do with the writing of history, I know that there are certain limitations under which those who write memoirs suffer in that they are very near the time of the actual events and objectivity is difficult to arrive at. That is why I think we have to await the whole of the book by Sir Anthony Eden before we can get a complete picture of his views. I would not make any further general observation at this time, except to say that I am far too busy to write any memoirs and I do not think that I am sufficiently talented so to do.
§ Mr. GaitskellIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is not a matter of what Sir Anthony Eden's views are, but what were the facts? Does not he realise that the only proper way to handle the situation is to invite some independent committee, or indeed, an historian, give him access to all the papers and all the information available, and to publish the truth?
§ Mr. ButlerThere has been a spate of memoirs of all sorts from military and other sources, and I think that we must trust to the general course of history to digest these and eventually to produce the whole matter in historical perspective.
§ Mr. BellengerAs the right hon. Gentleman disclosed that this privilege which he talked about had evidently been assumed by ex-high officers serving under the Crown, presumably there must be some rule applied to them as well as to ex-Ministers. Would not it help matters if the right hon. Gentleman published either a White Paper or gave extended information about what are the rules so that they may be known to everybody who is going to take part in the game?
§ Mr. ButlerThat raises a wider question which I shall need to consider.
§ Mr. HealeyIn the light of what the Home Secretary has just told us, can he at least say whether Sir Anthony 370 Eden was right in saying that although there were some members of the Cabinet who doubted the wisdom of the enterprise, for some reason or other they failed to express any effective opposition to it throughout its tragic and miserable history?
§ Mr. ButlerIf the hon. Gentleman thinks that is a contribution to history, its inaccuracy will be revealed by the further course of historical research.