§ 37. Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Attorney-General why he has decided not to institute proceedings against Mr. Chapman Pincher, the editor of theDaily Express,and the Express Newspapers Limited, in connection with the D notices issue.
§ The Attorney-GeneralNo proceedings were instituted because there was no evidence that Mr. Chapman Pincher, or the editor of the Daily Express, or the Express Newspapers Limited, had committed a criminal offence.
§ Mr. LewisAs very serious charges and allegations have been made against 82 these and other people by the Prime Minister and other persons in authority, should not they be charged so that the charges are proved against them or they have the opportunity of proving their innocence, or should not the charges be withdrawn and suitable apologies made?
§ The Attorney-GeneralAs I have said, the question directed to me was whether any of the people concerned had committed a criminal offence. The answer is "No", and the matter therefore was not for me.
§ Mr. BarberDoes the Attorney-General recall that last Thursday the Prime Minister told the House that inquiries had been made in the autumn of 1964, especially—that was his word—concerning Mr. Chapman Pincher? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House when those inquiries were started, when they were completed, whether the outcome was reported to Ministers and what was the outcome?
§ The Attorney-GeneralNone of these matters related to the office of Attorney-General, and they are not within my province.
§ Mr. BarberIs the Attorney-General, who opened the debate the other day, telling us that he has no knowledge of these matters, or is he deliberately refusing to give the information to the House in an attempt to cover up the scandalous conduct of the Prime Minister?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThere is nothing to cover up, and the Question directed to me is whether a criminal offence was committed by the persons referred to in that Question. I have given the Answer.
§ Sir G. NabarroIs it not a fact that a great deal of the mud thrown by the Prime Minister at the Daily Express, and its staff has now stuck? Would it not be appropriate and gracious for the right hon. and learned Gentleman to advise the Prime Minister to send an apology to the Daily Express and notably to Mr. Chapman Pincher?
§ The Attorney-GeneralNo doubt these questions can be addressed to the proper place.
§ Sir A. V. HarveyWill the Attorney-General deprecate this type of thing, 83 which amounts to persecution of individuals who cannot reply for themselves? Would it not be a good thing, in view of what happened at one minute to ten last Thursday, to reopen the Radcliffe Inquiry and make a few more inquiries about what did happen?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThis also does not arise out of the Question on the Order Paper.
§ Sir J. HobsonWill the Attorney-General confirm that there is no evidence of any official disclosure having been made between Colonel Lohan and Mr. Chapman Pincher, and will he say whether he knew the facts disclosed by the Prime Minister at the end of the debate last Thursday and did not mention them at the beginning because they were irrelevant or because he thought that they had nothing to do with the debate?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThese questions do not arise out of the Question on the Order Paper, and therefore are not for me.