SECRET DEFENCE PLANS LEAK OUT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 153, 1 July 1938, Page 7

SECRET DEFENCE PLANS LEAK OUT.

COMMONS DEBATE. Breach of Privilege Found By Committee. NO ACTION AGAINST M.P. I'-!.! Mi (Vli.ial Wi r .-1,.5.5. ''- iv —l I'. n.ni.) I:C<;HY. June :!o. - V '' ; " ' 1;,! " ! time in the Hon-.- ■• i ..!u:i...ii,. Mr. Chamberlain : ""-' :,: :l '■■■-'■■ «■!■■.W.lo.l Mouse. ■~ " I;,K '' ;! -■:J*' ! o<'»n on the decision ~[■ the < o.,:n■;•;>•,. ~„ Privileges ]~ ~M r, '!""-t was to tile etlV-t tin- ""■' : ' !'-'"i I»een a breach ot privilege '■:■• v-._ l». S :U!( iys ,(•„„..' Xll ,_ ?'"'".'' r ."' Ii!: "' ! l!l ; > (incstinn ask.. 1 '>'■' ''•''"' '•■"'-'■■ ''in no further action wa- re • ; i -11: -. * •»• i c«I. ''""'* ,Vi ' : - t: ""'! that the sc„p,. ~f ! ir;,; "-' "' members and the H0,,]t - r "" "" t i;, i'l 'i'ovn in anv ,-...,,- pletc co,' lP to l,e found in statute .„■ elsewhere. I, „„„ lHrjwly a inntt;ii . " r !l " »"•'- e.-tom. and the committee had ben, unable to find any precisprecedent for the circumstances of the present case. Alter reviewing the,,, circumstances the report stated that without mak any refection ii| the Militarv l „,in which had summoned Mr. Sandys as -, territorial officer, it appeared ' to' the c-onututtee that the summons ,„',..i, { Veil apper to be -n attempt to induce Jiim to -ive certain information at a time wVn the Hon,,, was propositi., i., eet vp a Sch-.t (ommi'tee to consider, among other things, the propriety of his Uim_ a-k.-i to give such information. liai.vdia'.-Iy after present in._. the repirt Mr. Chamberlain moved the appointment of a Select Committee io inuuiw into the substance of the statement made on June 27 in the House bv Mr. Sandys, and the action of the Minister concerned. Sir Donald Somervell. Attorney-Cienerul. and generally into the question of tl.-> applicahility of -the Official Secrets Act to members of the House in discharge of their Parliamentary duties. Tt was dear that the question of applicability covered a wide range. He •■oiild eom-ive nf cases where information obtained l.y a memlier of Parliament could be information of a secret character, the disclosure of which might be an offence under the Official Secrets Act. but which might, nevertheless, be used by such a member and in such a way as to be of great benefit to the nation. On the other hand he could also conceive of cases where such information mi'jht be used in such a wav as seriously to affect the safety of" the Realm. There might b 0 a conflict between privileges of the House—the risht of free speech—on the one hand and safety of the country on the other. Case Nearly 100 Years Ago. Mr. Chamberlain recalled a former occasion in the annals of the House nearly 100 years ago when it was laid down that privileges of Parliament must be used in the service of the Commonwealth and not to its danger. Mr. 1.,. Hore-Belisba. Secretary for War. in a personal statement, said that on Wednesday evening last week he had received a minute from the fleneral Staff regarding a letter from Mr. Sandys em-losing the draft of a question lie proposed to put in the House. The minute said: ''We are greatlv concerned that Mr. Sandys should have been in possession of such information. Not only does it appear that he is conversant with the details of a secret scheme-but that he was kept up to date in subsequent changes agreed to by the Air Officer Commanding-iii-C'hief, such as division of guns." Mr. mentioned that the document from which the information must have been taken was an emergency plan of defence of the Air Officer Comnjanding-iii-Chief. It was a document of the highest secrecy and instructions were that subordinate officers should be informed only of details necessary to enable them to take appropriate action. The document contained emergent' directions showing the exact dispositions to be taken by guns and the exact numbers and sources from which they were to be provided. Mr. Sandys, in a brief intervention, satid: '"Mr." Hore-Belisha no doubt knows all about the document. I don't. I know nothing about the disposition of guns. My question contained no reference to that. My question referred to the number and conditions of gnn*. If I had been asked not to put the qnestion I would not have thought of potting it." It is important to discover how the disclosure come about. He saw Mr. Chamberlain on Thursday morning, and Mr. Chamberlain told liim to lay the facts before the Attorney-General. Their concern was not merely to ask Mr. Sandys to withdraw the question, but to discover how the information was divulged, said Mr. Hore-Belisha. Personal Explanation. Mr. Hore-Belisha then explained why he had accepted the Attorney-General's ■dvke not to see Mr. Sandys himself. Sir Donald ."omervell had said that as the communication from the General * Staff disclosed a commission by someone of a serious breach of law he thought he ought to see Mr. Sandys himself. He could put the position as disclosed in the General Staff communication before him, and ask whether he ■f*« prepared to assist an investigation of this breach of law. Mr. Hore-Belisha also stated that on Monday, before the matter was raised in the House of Commons at all, the General Staff had completed its own preliminary inquiries and a Court of Inquiry had been ordered to >»e *ssembled according to normal procedure. After giving an assurance that all relevant facts would be available to the Select Committee, Mr. Hore-Belisha pointed out that the General Staff had a duty in safeguarding the country's defence plans. Mr. At t lee seconded Mr. Chamberlain's motion, which was supported l'V Sir Archibald Sinclair and Mr. Churchill, and accepted without division.