§ 2.50 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether a history of the Prisoners of War Department of the War Office during the 1939–45 War has been written, and, if so, when it will be published.]
EARL BATHURSTMy Lords, a history of the Prisoners of War Department of the War Office during the 1939–45 War, which was part of a series dealing with administration and staff work, was written to preserve experience gained during the Second World War. Neither this nor the other works in the series were ever intended for publication outside the War Office.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his 804 reply, could he answer this question, or bring it to the notice of his center honourable friend: if a research worker on the matter of prisoners of war wishes to consult this report, would it or would it not be available?
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANI was not referring to official use: I was referring to the case where a research student might want to write a book on the subject and asked for permission. Would he be given it or not?
EARL BATHURSTPermission may or may not be given, according to the wisdom of my center honourable friend with regard to that.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, what was the object of writing the history, if it is not going to be of some general assistance to the public; and what was its cost? It seems to me an astonishing position.
EARL BATHURSTMy Lords, I want to assure the noble Viscount opposite that there was no question of that. It was cleanly written in the directive to the officer who wrote this particular report that it was to be purely an internal War Office report for this particular department which administers the prisoners of war. There was never any question of the report being published. It is not a story, or anything of that sort. It is purely a factual report for use in this particular department of the War Office.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHThat seems to me all the more astounding. Have not a Prime Minister and Minister of Defence and all kinds of senior Staff Officers, written exactly what they like about it, relying upon official facts supplied to them? Was not the experience of the prisoners of war one of the greatest aspects to be considered in the history of the war? What is the use of spending all this public money if use is not going to be made of this report—if it is not going to be available to research people who want to look into this question?
EARL BATHURSTMy Lords, I assure the noble Viscount that this report has nothing to do with actual prisoners 805 of war or their personal experiences. It is purely to do with the particular department which administered the prisoners of war during the war, and I am sure the noble Viscount himself has been responsible for many similar types of report in his Department.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, may I plead with the noble Earl to make strong recommendations? There are far too many important documents and despatches which would be of tremendous interest but which, for some reason that has never been given, never see the light of day—documents with which some noble Lords in this House have perhaps been concerned. I would ask whether some consideration might not be given to the wider aspect at the same time.
EARL BATHURSTMy Lords, I am sure consideration will always be given to any request made by the noble Lord opposite. But I assure him that this particular report is not one of the sort which he has in mind.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHHas the noble Earl read it? What is the assurance based on?
EARL BATHURSTI have seen a large amount of the contents thereof. It is extremely technical and relates entirely to administration of prisoners of war from his department in the War Office. It has nothing to do with prisoners of war as such.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, is the noble Earl not aware that what one Prime Minister wrote was exceedingly technical in places? I sometimes wonder how much it is going to assist the international chess players in Moscow in the future. Surely, there is nothing against its being published just because it is technical?
§ LORD SHACKLETONWould it be too technical for Penguin Books?
EARL BATHURSTNo, my Lords; certainly it would not be suitable for Penguin Books. On a more serious note, I do not think I can say anything more to the noble Viscount opposite than what I have already said.
§ LORD STRANGMy Lords, is it not perfectly normal procedure for memoranda and special studies to be prepared in Departments for the information of Ministers and for record in the Department, without any thought or intention of publication?
EARL BATHURSTMy Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Strang, for that intervention. I understand that that is the position.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHPerhaps the Minister might be aware that we have often, as Cabinet Ministers, been totally dissatisfied with the amount of information issued by the Foreign Office to Ministers.