HC Deb 26 February 1996 vol 272 cc574-5
8. Mr. Grocott

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what recent representations he has received on his responsibilities for the strategic presentation of Government policy. [15244]

The Deputy Prime Minister

As I told the hon. Gentleman when I last answered questions to my Department, I have received no recent representations on my responsibilities other than from Opposition Members."—[Official Report, 29 January 1996; Vol. 270, c. 632.]

Mr. Grocott

With all the millions of words have been said and written about the Scott report, is not the irreducible truth that Ministers—I put it in its kindest way—deliberately withheld information from the House? As that is the clearest possible abuse of our parliamentary system, and as it is difficult to see how the system can operate if that abuse is allowed to continue, will the Deputy Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government and without reservation or qualification, publicly apologise to the House?

The Deputy Prime Minister

When the Scott report is considered in its totality, the overriding conclusion will be that the allegations peddled by the parliamentary Labour party for three years were unfounded. We did not arm Saddam Hussein or conspire to send innocent men to prison. The parliamentary Labour party and its spokesmen should apologise unreservedly for those charges.

Mr. Harry Greenway

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Scott report argues in a number of different directions at the same time and that, finally, it is impossible to take it seriously for that reason?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I have read of the Scott report that it is biblical in its judgments—there is something there to suit most people, depending on which quotation they use, but the facts remain that the central charges against the Government have not been proved by the report.

Mr. Skinner

The Deputy Prime Minister now has a newfangled machine in the biggest office in Whitehall and the new titles Deputy Prime Minister and First Secretary of State—which he screwed out of the Prime Minister on the day of the ballot. If he had had that spying machine and that position when the arms sales were taking place, could he have used them to tell all the Cabinet Ministers, "Look, you are going down the wrong track"? Does he think that that would have worked?

The Deputy Prime Minister

As so often with the hon. Gentleman, he is out of touch with his own party. Only one big lying machine has been introduced in modern politics recently and that is in Millbank. It has been put there by the Labour party.

Mr. Stephen

Does my right hon. Friend recall that, in the 1960s, British business man Greville Wynne was arrested by the Soviets, that a Member of Parliament, who should have known better, asked in the House whether Wynne was working for British intelligence and that, on that occasion, the Minister was obliged to lie to Parliament? Does my right hon. Friend accept that there are occasions, especially in relation to foreign affairs and defence, when not only should Ministers not answer the question, but Members of Parliament should not ask the question?

The Deputy Prime Minister

My hon. Friend raises important issues. I very much sympathise with the reply given by the right hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Mr. Shore), who clearly recognised the dilemma that Ministers sometimes face when they have to answer questions giving the fullest possible information to Parliament but also have regard to our security and commercial interests overseas. Every Minister has had to wrestle with that balancing judgment. The right hon. Gentleman had the integrity to answer that question honestly. It is of course apparent that it is long time since the Labour party was in a power and that now it is prepared to disregard totally what its own spokesman said when he was in office.

Forward to