HC Deb 12 December 1972 vol 848 cc231-4
Q4. Mr. Arthur Davidson

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Home Office and the Lord Chancellor's Department over the operation of the Official Secrets Act; and if he will make a statement.

The Prime Minister

I am not aware of any aspect of the operation of the Act which calls specifically for co-ordination between my right hon. Friends. Neither is responsible for its enforcement in individual cases, if that is what the hon. Member has in mind.

Mr. Davidson

That was not what I had in mind. Is the Prime Minister aware that nobody except a few top civil servants now regards the Official Secrets Act as anything other than a mess and a menace? Will he give a firm pledge today that we shall have an early debate on the Franks Committee Report and, if he is serious about his desire for more open government, will he accept that he cannot have open government and the official Secrets Act as well in its present form?

The Prime Minister

The hon. Gentleman is well aware of the recommendations of the Franks Committee. The Government are studying those and in due course will make their recommendations to the House. On the question of open government, I have been constantly pressed by hon. Members opposite to ensure the utmost confidentiality of all Government documents, and in particular of computer-organised information. One cannot reconcile the demands of Government Departments to make certain that everything remains confidential which is of a confidential nature and at the same time refuse to face up to the implications when documents are taken out of Government Departments.

Mr. Pardoe

Will the Prime Minister now say whether his Government's plan to close all the Cornish railway lines is an official or an unofficial secret? Does he realise that his Government's invasion of the Railway Gazette is only a little less ludicrous than his predecessors' action on "D" Notices?

The Prime Minister

This was not a Government action. There is a procedure which has been laid down for many years that if any documents marked "Confidential" or above are found to be missing from a Government Department, there is an obligation on that Department to endeavour to discover the reason why it is missing. This is first done through the departmental machinery. If the departmental machinery and security arrangements are unable to trace a document, the proper course is for the Department to put the matter in the hands of the police. This is done through the Director of Public Prosecutions. This is what happened in this case. It is a longstanding procedure, and if the Government Department had not carried it out it would have been open to accusations of negligence. We have already had one case, some eighteen months ago, in which documents were found to be missing, and the House quite rightly immediately pressed for the fullest inquiry as to why it had happened.

Mr. Elystan Morgan

Will the Prime Minister agree that it would be very much in the public interest, where there is a plan of this sort affecting the railways—a plan which can change the circumstances of millions of people in Britain—that it should be brought to public attention? Will he further agree that the protection of official secrets should, as the Franks Committee said, deal with the question of the security of the State, currency and international relations, and should never be allowed as a subterfuge to hide the devious plans of government in respect of a vital public service?

The Prime Minister

In regard to the Official Secrets Act, I have already said that the Government are considering the report of the Franks Committee and in due course no doubt the House will debate the Government's recommendations. On the first point, it is long-accepted practice that the Government have the right to take the advice of their officials, so that they can prepare the necessary information and proposals and so that the Government have the opportunity to consider them in reaching their conclusions. I do not believe that it necessarily follows that before any consideration has been given to any proposal by an official it should be published; nor do I accept that it should be given away or stolen as a document and be made public. That is not open government. Open government consists of the Government's having the opportunity to consider the options and publishing them in a Green Paper, or in another way, for public debate in the House.

Mr. Harold Wilson

When the right hon. Gentleman outlined what he termed the normal procedure in these cases—and I think that he went further than anyone has before on the "leak" procedure—it seemed to me and to my right hon. and learned Friend the former Attorney-General that it was somewhat different as the Prime Minister portrayed it from what we understand it to be. I do not think that there has been a change in the practice. Perhaps the Prime Minister will look at his answer again to see whether he has exactly portrayed it to us. I do not want to press the point across the Floor of the House. If necessary, perhaps the Prime Minister will make a correction subsequently, or confirm that what he said was right.

Reverting to the deep concern which is felt about the computerisation of Census material and so on, can the Prime Minister say why the reports of the Royal Statistical Society and the Computer Society have not yet been published? They have been in the hands of the Government for some time.

The Prime Minister

We are dealing with this matter of publication, and we shall publish as soon as it is practicable to do so.

Dealing with the right hon. Gentleman's first point, I will check on what the right hon. Gentleman said. Naturally, I checked carefully before dealing with this Question because I thought that the matter would be raised. It is a matter on which Prime Ministers and other Ministers have to keep a constant watch. If the right hon. Gentleman has any aspect in mind in which he thinks that I deviated from the normal procedure I shall gladly check on it.