§ 25. Mr. O'CONNORasked the Home Secretary whether it is the practice for information as to arrests which have been made, and as to impending criminal trials, to be issued to the Press from Scotland Yard; and whether he proposes, in view of the observations of the Court of Criminal Appeal in the recent cases of R. v. the "Surrey Comet" and R. v. the Editor of the "Daily Mail," to put an end to this procedure?
§ Mr. CLYNESIt is the practice of the Commissioner of Police to authorise the making to the Press of such communications as may properly be published, because such communications tend to accuracy in news and often assist the ends of justice. It is not the practice of the Commissioner to communicate information, for instance as to antecedents, which would prejudice the legitimate interests of persons accused. He informs me that the details published in the "Surrey Comet" were not even known to any person in the department at New Scotland Yard that is the medium of communications to the Press. As regards the information published in the "Daily Mail," he states that it is an absolute rule not to give the Press information as to the criminal records of persons 1130 accused. I do not know what grounds, if any, exist for the allegation that the details in the "Surrey Comet" in the other case emanated from the Department at Scotland Yard. On the facts of these cases, therefore, no ground at present appears for any change of practice: but I need hardly say that, if ground did exist, the Commissioner would take action at once, with my full approval.
§ Mr. O'CONNORIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that defending counsel, who happens to be a Law Officer of the Crown, said, in regard to the "Surrey Comet" case, that the material had emanated from the Press Bureau at Scotland Yard?
§ Mr. CLYNESYes, and it was because of that knowledge that my answer was framed in the terms in which I have given it.
§ Mr. O'CONNORAre any steps taken to ensure that material is not issued from Scotland Yard which, if published, would constitute contempt of court?
§ Mr. CLYNESI think that the terms of my reply will emphasise that.
§ Sir K. WOODIs it not a fact that, in this case, the defendants were dealt with by the judge on the very same information which was received from the Press Bureau at Scotland Yard?
§ Mr. CLYNESI cannot say what was in the mind of the court, or how far it might have been influenced by that fact.
§ Mr. HOLFORD KNIGHTCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the risk of impropriety which might occur in connection with this bureau, would not lead him to consider its suppression?
§ Mr. CLYNESNo, Sir, it is a very useful section of Scotland Yard, and I do not think that any isolated instance of this kind justifies that suggestion.