HC Deb 01 March 1956 vol 549 cc1345-6
17. Mr. Willey

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in which cases a copy of the transcript of evidence taken under Section 16 of the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907, has been placed in the Library of the House of Commons.

Major Lloyd-George

A transcript of the proceedings in the case of R. v. Lapper and Newey and the Yorkshire Electricity Board was put in the Library of the House in 1952, and a transcript in the case of R. v. Timothy Evans was put in the Library in 1953.

Mr. Willey

While thanking the right hon. and gallant Gentleman for his reply, may I ask whether he is aware that it is difficult to discover what consistent principle governs this practice? Will he endeavour to implement the intention he has already announced of clarifying this matter as soon as he can?

Mr. L. M. Lever

rose—

Major Lloyd-George

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the difficulty arises from one Section of the Criminal Appeal Act. I did say that I was prepared to look at this, and in a Standing Committee this morning a new Clause was accepted which will make it possible to do this.

Mr. L. M. Lever

I was about to draw the attention of the House to the new Clause which was introduced this morning.

Mr. Younger

If the Home Secretary is to amend the law, will he consider whether it should be amended even more widely than he has suggested? Is there any ground of principle why a written account of proceedings held in public should not be made available more widely than by merely making it available in the Library of the House?

Major Lloyd-George

I should like to consider that. The Criminal Appeal Act, 1907, says that the report should be made available to the Home Secretary "for his use," and it was thought that that provision might preclude him from having it for other purposes. With the acceptance of the new Clause in the Criminal Justice Administration Bill (Lords), the difficulty about the Library of the House will be obviated. I will look at the other point. I believe that the original objection was purely on grounds of expense, but I will investigate the position.