§ 2.41 p.m.
§ Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBYMy 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 the police inquiries into certain allegations of a criminal nature in the book entitled Babies for Burning have now been completed; whether any Report upon them has yet been received from the Director of Public Prosecutions, and whether the revelations made in the Sunday Times newspaper on 30th March 1975 about the authors and contents of this book will be inquired into.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Harris of Greenwich)My Lords, I understand that the police have not yet completed their inquiries and have therefore not yet sent a final report about them to the Director of Public Prosecutions. There is no doubt that the police will take into account the Sunday Times article of 30th March so far as it is relevant to their inquiries.
§ Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBYMy Lords, does my noble friend recall 344 that this matter was referred to the police for inquiries as long ago as October, and will he do his best to see that these are speeded up? May I ask my noble friend whether he knows why these inquiries are still going on? Also, is he aware that the contents of this book were obtained, on the admission of the authors themselves, by deceit and lying, and by evidence obtained by the most reprehensible means of concealed tapes which is condemned anywhere, except perhaps in the hands of trustworthy police? Is he aware that this book has its influence on public opinion at the time of discussion on the Abortion (Amendment) Bill in another place, and will he ask—
§ Several Noble Lords: Order, order!
§ Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBYMy Lords, if noble Lords will wait a moment, they will have the question.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, if I may address myself to the Leader of the House, we have been told that this is a matter for police inquiries and may, therefore, be the subject of criminal prosecution of one party or another. May I appeal to the noble Lord the Leader of the House to say that it would be more in accordance with the traditions of this House if, having been told that, we held our hands and refrained from making prejudicial statements until police inquiries were complete?
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Shepherd)My Lords, this is a very difficult matter. If I may so, it is a question not of appealing to the Leader of the House but of appealing to your Lordships' House because, at the end of the day, we are the masters of our own proceedings. If I may say so, I had an area of disquiet about the way in which the supplementary questions were being put. I hope that my noble friend will put his questions to the Minister in that area for which the Government themselves are responsible.
§ The Earl of LONGFORDMy Lords, may I point out—
§ SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: No!
345§ The Earl of LONGFORDMay I ask a question, then?
§ SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Order, order!
§ Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBYMy Lords, I was interrupted.
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, supplementary questions were being put by my noble friend Lord Houghton when the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, intervened. I sought to deal with that intervention. I think it would therefore be right for my noble friend to complete his supplementaries—I hope as I have advised him—and if my noble friend Lord Longford then wishes to intervene to put a question to the Government, I hope he will do so.
§ Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBYMy Lords, I was about to put this question. Would my noble friend ask his right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to ask the Select Committee which is now considering the Bill in another place to be on its guard against relying upon evidence in this squalid book? That is what I am asking my noble friend to do.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, on the last point, I will certainly draw the attention of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to what my noble friend has said. My noble friend will, I am sure, understand why I do not think it appropriate to answer his second question. As regards the first part of the question, where he alluded to the delay in police inquiries, I am informed that delay has been caused by the fact that the police have experienced substantial difficulty in interviewing one of the authors of the book, and in obtaining tape recordings which are alleged to support the claims under investigation.
§ The Earl of LONGFORDMy Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister aware— I so informed him yesterday and again today, and I also informed the noble Lord, Lord Houghton—that libel proceedings are being brought against the Sunday Times? That was not brought out in any of the questions or answers, and in the circumstances is the noble Lord prepared to agree that it would be a great mistake to accept a word that 346 the noble Lord, Lord Houghton, has said about this matter?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I really do not think it appropriate to go into the merits of this question.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, would it not be appropriate if we withheld all comments of this kind until the inquiries are complete, because the most important thing is the administration of justice?