HC Deb 27 May 1965 vol 713 cc831-3
26. Mr. Godber

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a further statement about information to the Press on the subject of the first references to be made to the Prices Board.

Mr. Albu

As my right hon. Friend informed the House in the debate on 11th May, reports in the Press about the likely subjects of the first references to the National Board for Prices and Incomes appear to have been based on intelligent speculation rather than on any leakage of information. Although the subject was raised with him during the previous week by some of the industrial correspondents with whom he was discussing recent developments in the prices and incomes policy, neither he nor the Department gave them any new information on this subject.

Mr. Godber

Perhaps I could preface my supplementary question by acknowledging that the First Secretary suggested that I raised the matter again so that he could clarify what he said on a previous occasion. He apologised to me for the fact that he could not be here today; it is only fair to say that. May I ask the Minister who is replying precisely what he meant by his last response, because the First Secretary was very categorical in what he said in the debate. He said. Not only can I answer for my own Department, but I can answer for others: there was no leak … There was no informed talk to correspondents …—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 11th May, 1965; Vol. 712, c. 310.] This does not seem to tie in with what the hon. Gentleman has just said. In fact, it seems from what he has told us that guidance was given. Therefore, should not the First Secretary apologise to those people in the industries concerned who are embarrassed by this leak?

Mr. Albu

No. My right hon. Friend stands by what he originally said in the debate. He did not give the correspondents any new information about our intentions. There was an informed briefing, and there was a good deal of speculation, but the interesting thing about that speculation is that newspapers published forecasts of our intentions which were not exactly accurate. In fact, many of them published completely different forecasts, which only shows that they were picking and choosing among a large number of possible candidates.

Mr. Godber

Surely it is clear when one studies those reports that they did come very near to the truth and, in fact, that two of them were precisely accurate. It is clear that some fairly plain indication was given. Surely the purpose of the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion that I should table a Question about the matter again was that it should be revealed to the House. It would be better if the right hon. Gentleman came clean and apologised fully.

Mr. Albu

It is clear that my right hon. Friend did not give any direct information of the sort which the right hon. Gentleman has in mind. No doubt he was asked a number of questions. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, it is very difficult when one is asked questions and there is a lot of speculation, for correspondents not to pick up these things and make what they can out of them.