HC Deb 14 July 1964 vol 698 cc1027-9

The following Question stood upon the Order Paper:

Q8. Mr. SWINGLER

To ask the Prime Minister if he will move to set up a tribunal under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, to investigate the premature disclosure by Ministers or public servants of a document dated 8th June circularised to certain Press officers of the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office.

The Prime Minister

For the convenience of the House, may I answer Question No. Q8?

The Answer is, "No, Sir".

Mr. Speaker

We are now straight. Mr. Swingler.

Mr. Swingler

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We now know where we are.

First, why did the Prime Minister transfer this Question to the Minister of Defence in the first place?

Mr. Speaker

That question is out of order, but I do not want to stop the hon. Gentleman asking something else.

Mr. Swingler

Does the Prime Minister agree with the Foreign Secretary who said on 15th June that there was a premature disclosure about the negotiations with Spain, and are we to understand that he is taking no action about it? Third, how did it come about that a Ministry of Defence spokesman was quoted in the Daily Express of 9th June as saying that the deal had gone through? Can the right hon. Gentleman explain that?

The Prime Minister

Yes, certainly I can. The Navy public relations organisation had a manuscript note for use if, and when, agreement had been reached and announced. The brief was a purely internal document, not circulated outside the public relations organisation. The public relations officer knew that agreement was imminent and understood from the trend of questions put to him by certain correspondents that agreement had been reached. In this circumstance, he said what he did.

Mr. Ridley

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is nothing whatever reprehensible about the conducting of these negotiations being known, and there is no reason whatever why they should not have been made public?

The Prime Minister

I said that earlier. My hon. Friend is quite right. All of us thought that the agreement was about to be concluded. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Indeed, I have no doubt myself that it would have been. This officer simply made a mistake. Correspondents put questions to him in a certain way which is not unknown to right hon. and hon. Members.

Mr. Healey

Is not this a highly disreputable matter? Is the Prime Minister aware that on Monday the Secretary of State for Defence told the House, in response to a question from me, that no agreement was reached and that negotiations were going on with several other Governments besides the British Government? Is it not absolutely clear that in this case the Government caused one of their officials to make a false statement to the Press—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—and that the whole of this story has arisen not out of the commercial interests of this country but entirely out of a desire on the part of the Prime Minister to have General Franco as his running mate in the election?

The Prime Minister

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not make that kind of accusation. Right hon. and hon. Members opposite may have their standards. We do not act on those standards. The negotiations proceeded with the Spanish naval authorities after the disclosure in the Daily Express, and it was not until the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition intervened that they were cut off.

Several Hon. Members rose

—

Mr. Speaker

We cannot debate this now. Let us get on.