§ 31. Mr. Gordon Walkerasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will publish the correspondence that passed between his Department and Field Marshal Lord Alexander about the alteration of a passage in his original dispatch about preparations for the battle of Alam Haifa.
§ Mr. ProfumoNo, Sir. It is generally recognised that Departmental correspondence of this kind should not be disclosed.
§ Mr. Gordon WalkerSince parts of documents which are not usually published have been published in this case, would it not be wiser to publish all the relevant parts, because there is a certain suspicion around in some quarters that something or other was being a little bit covered up? As the rule has been broken so far as to publish some parts of documents which would not normally be published, would it not be better to go further and publish this link, which would bring the whole into the clear, into the open?
§ Mr. ProfumoI do not think that is necessary. The reason I published the original phraseology—of course, with the agreement of Field Marshal Alexander—was largely because the right hon. Gentleman appeared to have made a public statement that it looked like political forgery. I was not so worried about the right hon. Gentleman as about the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) who was the Secretary of State at the time, and it seemed to me that in fairness to him I should put this straight. I can go as far as this with the right hon. Gentleman. I do not think anybody doubts now that there has not been any chicanery behind the scenes, but if the right hon. Gentleman is right, I make this offer. I will very gladly, if the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Easington wishes to come to see me, show him those relevant parts of the papers in which, I think, he is more interested than anyone else.
§ Mr. Gordon WalkerReally, this is not a thing between the right hon. Gentleman and me or between my right hon. Friend and me but a matter in 970 which there is considerable public concern. It is not any personal, triangular thing, but a matter which the right hon. Gentleman should regard in the light of general, fairly widespread, public concern, which expressed itself at the time.
§ Mr. ProfumoI am anxious to help the right hon. Gentleman, but I do not think I can go so far as he asks, for that would be breaking a very sound tradition, which the Labour Party in its time itself went on. It always did. We cannot have all these sorts of documents published. That leads to all sorts of difficulties. Therefore, as I cannot make them public, I am making the offer, so that if the right hon. Gentleman trusts his right hon. Friend he can persuade his right hon. Friend that there is nothing wrong.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs it necessary that I should come into the picture again? I have consulted the right hon. Gentleman. As he knows, I have accepted his explanation, and, in particular, repudiate any idea that this was a political forgery, and because I have the highest respect for the integrity of Field Marshal Alexander I accept his explanation.
§ Mr. PagetIs it not in the first place highly undesirable that officers on the active list, such as field marshals, should publish these reminiscences one after another criticising other people? But if this is to happen, is it not desirable that the documents themselves should be published?
§ Sir C. OsborneWhat about politicians?
§ Mr. ProfumoIt has been very widely and generally done and it has been accepted as a fact of life, that not only field marshals but also ex-politicians do this. I am only answering the Question on the Paper, and I cannot make public the particular documents which the right hon. Gentleman wishes to see.