George Henry Canning

HC Deb 07 June 1956 vol 553 cc1269-72

37. Mr. S. Silverman

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it was on his instructions that at the inquest on George Henry Canning, who died in one of Her Majesty's prisons, the prison officer concerned, the governor of the prison and the Prison Commissioners were all represented at the inquest by the same solicitor and counsel; and when and on what grounds it was decided that the interests of these parties to the inquiry were not in conflict.

Major Lloyd-George

These arrangements, for which I accept responsibility, were made by the Prison Commissioners after taking legal advice. As regards the governor, it is routine practice for a solicitor or counsel representing a Government Department to represent also the officer in charge of the unit or branch concerned

As regards the officer, the Commissioners, on the information before them, following the police investigation of the case, saw no reason to foresee any conflict of interests. Accordingly, on 4th May they offered to arrange for their representative to watch his interests if he so wished, and he accepted.

Mr. Silverman

Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman appreciate how very unsatisfactory his Answer is? Does he not appreciate that this was a case in which a man, for whose personal safety the Prison Commissioners were responsible, had died in circumstances of some violence, and that where-as the right and duty of the prison officer was to defend himself from criticism, the duty of the Prison Commissioners was to be impartial and to ascertain the truth—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."]—this is a very important matter—and, that, therefore, since the evidence—[HON. MEMBERS; "Speech."]. Mr. Speaker, may I be allowed to ask the Question?

Mr. Speaker

Order. Let the Question be asked and answered.

Mr. Silverman

Therefore, since the evidence was known to be conflicting, there was an obvious difference of interest between the Prison Commissioners and the prison officer, and that an inquiry in which those conflicting interests were represented by the same solicitor and counsel was obviously a travesty of justice?

Major Lloyd-George

The hon. Gentleman will probably not be surprised to hear that I could not agree with what he says. The fact is that when this occurrence took place, the police made the fullest investigations, entirely independent of any prison officer at all. They were allowed to question all prisoners without any prison officer being present. As a result of the investigation, the governor and the Prison Commissioners came to the conclusion that there was no conflict of interest whatever between the prison officer and the Commissioners, and therefore they decided that those men should be represented by the same persons.

Mr. Silverman

Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that what he has just said amounts to a statement by the Home Office, for which he is responsible, that they, with the assistance of the police, prejudged the very question which the coroner was investigating?

Major Lloyd-George

That is quite an inaccurate statement.

Mr. Silverman

It is not.

Major Lloyd-George

The investigation was made by the police and not by the Home Office. If the hon. Gentleman has anything to say about the coroner, I can only repeat what he is reported to have said—namely, that everybody would agree that the inquiry had been very properly carried out.

Mr. Younger

While not wishing to suggest that there has been an improper motive in this matter, may I ask the Home Secretary whether he will take full account of the fact that the public is necessarily very much more anxious about the form of inquiry into events which occur in prison under strict authority than about an inquiry conducted into events occurring outside? Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider whether in future it would not in the normal case be better that there should be separate representation of all parties, even if it happens to be the opinion of the police or the Prison Commissioners that there is no conflict?

Major Lloyd-George

I will look into that point, but I think it is proper to point out that there was obviously no conflict in this particular case, and, so far as the public are concerned, there was an inquiry by the coroner, who expressed the view that the investigation was very properly carried out.

38. Mr. S. Silverman

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he took to ensure that the relatives of George Henry Canning were legally represented at the inquest into his death in prison.

Major Lloyd-George

It was for the relatives themselves to decide whether to be legally represented at the inquest and to seek legal advice on this matter if they were in doubt, and no action was called for on my part.

Mr. Silverman

Does not the right hon. Gentleman even yet appreciate that the whole conduct of the matter was hopelessly biassed from the start, and that if the right hon. Gentleman came to the conclusion that it was proper for the prison officer to be represented at public expense by solicitor and counsel instructed by him, this ceased to be a routine matter, and the relatives of the man principally concerned ought to have been offered the same facilities?

Major Lloyd-George

I must once again repudiate what the hon. Gentleman has said. He is so biassed in this matter.

Mr. Silverman

I am not.

Major Lloyd-George

He obviously is biassed. I have made plain that the whole of this inquiry was perfectly properly conducted.

Mr. Silverman

I do not agree.

Major Lloyd-George

That convinces me even more that what I am saying is right. It was open to the relatives to have legal representation if they had wanted it. Both this man's brothers were there for two days of the inquiry, and one was there for the other day. It was open to them to have legal representation if they wanted it.

Mr. Speaker

It seems to me from what I have heard that this is a matter which cannot be thrashed out at Question Time without infringing the rights of other Members. The hon. Member should try to raise the matter on the Adjournment, and, in the meantime, ask Question 39.

39. Mr. S. Silverman

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what facilities were afforded, prior to the inquest, to the relatives of George Henry Canning to inquire into the circumstances resulting in his death.

Major Lloyd-George

I am not clear what sort of facilities the hon. Member has in mind, but in fact none were requested.

Mr. Silverman

Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman appreciate that where there was a body of evidence which blamed a prison officer for the death, and a substantial body of evidence which denied it, then the opportunity of which the Prison Commissioners availed themselves for questioning both sides and arriving at an opinion, which prejudged the whole issue, ought to have been offered to the relatives of the man who died? Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman appreciate that all the witnesses in the case were in his custody and under his control the whole time?

Major Lloyd-George

That is quite untrue. I have said in reply to the hon. Gentleman's first Question that when the police made their inquiries no prison officer was present.

Mr. Silverman

That is not my point.

Major Lloyd-George

It is one of the points, anyway. With regard to prejudging the case, I would ask the hon. Gentleman to read what the coroner said at the end of the inquiry.

Mr. Silverman

On a point of order. In view of the wholly unsatisfactory reply to these three Questions, I beg to give notice that I shall take the earliest opportunity of having the matter debated.