That is not my reading of the legislation, and it is not theirs. They welcome the initiative of the Secretary of State. In any event, I remind the House that I would not start from here. We would have addressed the matter 14 years ago when I first introduced my early-day motion and my Bill. We would have looked at the cases in greater detail.
During world war one, attempts were made by people like myself in Parliament to raise these executions. They were slapped down and suppressed. There was no candour or debate. The argument was advanced—it had some legitimacy—that the country was in the middle of a conflict. Come the 1920s, the matter was raised by several hon. Members, one of whom was Ernest Thurtle, the Member for Shoreditch. He was slapped down and told that he was wrong.
The point that cannot be escaped is that for 75 years it suited the British establishment to suppress the documentation relating to these cases. Now that the documents have become available to families, jurors, politicians and journalists and we see how flawed the trials were, people say, ““It is too late; it is a matter of history.”” How very convenient.
Armed Forces Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Andrew Mackinlay
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 7 November 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Armed Forces Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
451 c780 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 00:09:56 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358721
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358721
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358721