§ 3.24 p.m.
§ Lord SHINWELL: My Lords, in the hope of getting a more satisfactory Answer to my second Question on the Order Paper, I beg to ask it.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether any Cabinet papers including minutes of Cabinet discussions and decisions were available to the public relating to the repatriation of interned 1334 persons and war prisoners during the period 1944 to 1948, and whether there are any details of numbers sent and to which countries.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, under the 30-year rule, all records of Cabinet and Ministerial Committee discussions on the repatriation of prisoners of war and interned persons are open to public inspection in the Public Record Office. In many cases, details or estimates of the numbers of the various allied and enemy nationals to be repatriated are given.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, I hope my noble friend will not mind if I ask him to give me a more satisfactory reply to my Question. Is he aware that there are no minutes available to the public, in the Record Office or elsewhere, which indicate that there were discussions either in the War Cabinet in 1944 or in the Attlee Cabinet from 1945 to 1947? Is my noble friend aware that I, as a member of that Cabinet, cannot recall a single occasion when information was conveyed to the Cabinet on this subject? Is it not time that, instead of indulging—and I am not blaming my noble friend for this—in a cover-up, there was a full disclosure of what happened, rather than putting the blame on one person, namely, Anthony Eden?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, my noble friend's memory may be better than mine—I do not know—but I am advised that the Cabinet records open in the Public Record Office include all those concerned with the repatriation of Soviet citizens after the war. As my noble friend will know very well, as Minister of Fuel and Power at that time, he was a member of the Committee which dealt at several meetings with the repatriation of Soviet citizens. The full records of this Committee are also open in the Public Record Office.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, in view of the statement that has just been made, I would ask my noble friend to provide the evidence. I cannot recall a single occasion when I was called to a meeting to discuss this question. At no time did that happen, and I doubt whether there is anything in the Public Record Office to substantiate what my noble friend has said.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, the noble Lord was a member of that Committee and he is at liberty to go and inspect the records.
§ Lord BOOTHBYMy Lords, may I just ask the noble Lord whether he is aware of the fact that this nation, which has now been blamed and is rather stained, knew nothing about what was going on during these critical years in Europe, nor did Parliament, nor, according to the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, did the Cabinet? Is the noble Lord aware that the responsibility lay entirely with the Foreign Office, and that the ministerial responsibility lay on the shoulders of two men, and two men alone—Anthony Eden and Ernest Bevin? Should not the Government make these facts clear for the rest of the world to know?—because we are suffering under a stain which we do not deserve.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, may I say to the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, that I think it would be very wrong to blame individuals, and this is where I agree with my noble friend Lord Shinwell, who emphasised the point. After all, there were various summit conferences at Yalta, Moscow and Potsdam, where I understand these matters were discussed; but it would be absolutely unfair to judge people who reacted to circumstances in a critical situation; and I resent it.
§ Lord BETHELLMy Lords, is the noble Lord the Leader of the House aware that only this morning one very important document was made available for the first time? It was destroyed most wantonly in 1969 and had to be recovered as a fifth-hand photocopy from the National Archives in Washington. Does this not indicate that there may be other documents which have been destroyed or which may he retained in Departments, which could be recovered from Washington, from our allies, who seem to have, if I may say so, a much more assiduous approach to the preservation of the history of our nation?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I cannot accept that. I cannot accept what the noble Lord says about the Americans' assiduous approach to our nation in that way. It may well be that some records 1336 have been destroyed; I do not know. All I am saying now is that the documents are there and they are available for the public to see.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, in view of the importance of this matter and the intense controversy which was aroused by the recent television programme on the subject, would the noble Lord the Leader of the House make the documents available in the Library of your Lordships' House?
§ Lord PEARTNo, my Lords, I do not think so. I have no authority for that. I think the noble Lord should consult the Public Record Office.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, as regards the placing of blame for events in 1944 and 1945, it is a worrying matter and it is not easily disposed of at Question Time. May I ask the noble Lord the Leader of the House to remind noble Lords that there was a full debate in this House over two years ago on this subject, so a great deal is on the record about it.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I agree with the noble Lord.
Baroness WARD of NORTH TYNESIDEMy Lords, would it be a good idea to have another debate, when this very important matter could be rediscussed with the further information that is now available?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I do not think so. We are too busy with Scottish devolution and other matters.
§ Lord BETHELLMy Lords, can the Leader of the House please explain why he is answering this Question and not the noble and learned Lord in whose ministerial responsibility public records lie?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I am rather surprised at that naïve question. I answer for the Government.